[2026:RJ-JP:5059] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15818/2025 Dharamraj S/o Shri Ramprasad, aged about 35 Years, R/o Deoli PS Bonli, District Tonk (Rajasthan) (At Present Accused-Petitioner Confined Central Jail Sawai Madhopur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Majhar Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 03/02/2026 1. This bail application has been filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR No.363/2025 registered at Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur for offence(s) under Section(s) 303(2) of B.N.S. and Section(s) 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner is an innocent person and has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, the presence of petitioner for custodial interrogation is not required. Learned counsel also submits that co-accused have already been granted bail by the trial Court itself and the bail application of petitioner was rejected merely on the ground that he has criminal antecedents. Conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, he, therefore, prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail. [2026:RJ-JP:5059] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-15818/2025] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that petitioner has criminal antecedents of committing offences of similar nature and as many as four other cases are pending against him, therefore, the bail application of petitioner is liable to be rejected. 4. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, particularly the fact that the offences are triable by Magistrate and charge-sheet has already been filed, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 5. Therefore, this bail application is allowed and accused-petitioner Dharamraj S/o Shri Ramprasad is ordered to be released on bail, provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioner shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar nature of offence(s) during currency of the bail granted by this Court. If the petitioner is found to have been involved in similar nature of offence(s) or such information comes to the notice of the Court, the same shall be a sufficient ground for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner by this Court. 6. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J TN/39