[2026:RJ-JP:1960] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16007/2025 Sumit Chandela S/o Shri Dinesh Chandela, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Plot No. 7-8 Suryalok-1, Chaproli, Police Station Badalpura, District Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttarpradesh. Other Address- 19, Rama Park, Main Bhagat Singh Road, Kishanganj, Mlkangaj, North Delhi, Delhi. (At Present Confined In District Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Malwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Virendra Kumar Kureel, I.O./SHO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 16/01/2026 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.201/2025 registered at Police Station Murlipura, District Jaipur (West) for the offence punishable under Section 309(6) of BNS, 2023. During the course of investigation, offence under Section 310(2) of BNS has been found proved against the petitioner. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that money dispute has been converted into a serious criminal offence of dacoity as petitioner was tenant [2026:RJ-JP:1960] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16007/2025] in the house of the complainant. It is submitted that Rs.44,00,000/- has already been recovered by the investigating agency out of the alleged loot of Rs.60,00,000/-. It is submitted that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that one other case has been registered against the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, as also the fact that trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sumit Chandela S/o Shri Dinesh Chandela, shall be released on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. [2026:RJ-JP:1960] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16007/2025] 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of this bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /18