[2026:RJ-JP:3873] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16701/2025 Deepak Urf Kochya S/o Shri Ramkaran, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Gurjaro Ki Sirohi, Police Station Narena, District Jaipur Rural. At Present Resident Of Goner, Plot No. 52 Sector 05 Ramsingh Colony, Police Station Malpura Gate, District Jaipur City (Raj.) (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.279/2022 registered at Police Station Shahpura (Jaipur Rural), District Jaipur Rural (Raj.) for offence punishable under Section 382 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It has been alleged in the FIR that on 05.08.2022, certain unknown persons arrived on a motorcycle and snatched the laptop belonging to the daughter of the complainant. Counsel submits that on the date of alleged incident petitioner was in judicial confinement which is evident from the jail report dated 16.01.2026, which indicates that the petitioner had already been [2026:RJ-JP:3873] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-16701/2025] remanded to judicial custody on 01.08.2022 in connection with FIR No. 660/2022 registered at Police Station Mansarovar, District Jaipur. Counsel submits that in the aforementioned case benefit of bail was granted to the petitioner by co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 25.08.2022 and he was released from custody on 30.08.2022. He contends that petitioner has been made accused in this case without any evidence and solely on the basis of the fact that 49 other cases have been registered against him. Counsel submits that co-accused namely, Mota urf Ramjilal, Raju and Sonu @ Sonya @ Mukesh have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 26.09.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 49 other cases have been registered against him. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. It is a settled proposition of law that the mere pendency or registration of criminal cases against an accused cannot, by itself, constitute a valid ground for rejection of a bail application. The Court is required to consider the specific role attributed to the accused in the case in question, and only upon arriving at a prima facie satisfaction regarding the involvement of the accused can such circumstances be taken into account while deciding the bail application. [2026:RJ-JP:3873] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-16701/2025] 6. Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the jail report dated 16.01.2026, as also the fact that aforementioned co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court and trial will take considerable 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 fit and proper to allow this bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Deepak Urf Kochya S/o Shri Ramkaran shall be released on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh 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. 8. 8. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, it is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in the first and third week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO shall record the presence of the petitioner in Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned [2026:RJ-JP:3873] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-16701/2025] SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/62