[2026:RJ-JP:16785] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4978/2026 Dhruvsingh S/o Betal Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gurjar Adda, Bajrang Gate, Rudawal, Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aniket Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 21/04/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 482 of BNSS in FIR No.125/2024 registered at Police Station Masalpur, District Karauli for the offence under Section 305(a) of BNS, 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a young man of about 28 years of age and is facing allegations of committing theft along with other co-accused. It is contended that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused. It is further submitted that the recovery has been effected from the co- [2026:RJ-JP:16785] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4978/2026] accused and nothing remains to be recovered from the present petitioner. He averred that petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation. He argued that there is no need of custodial interrogation of the petitioner, hence the bail application may be allowed. 4. On the contrary, the learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that there are four criminal antecedents against the petitioner which reflect his criminal history. It is further submitted that the recovery is still pending and the remaining stolen article i.e. a mobile phone is yet to be recovered from the petitioner. Hence, it is contended that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. On consideration of the rival submission and material available on record and in light of submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor as well as remaining stolen articles are yet to be recovered from the petitioner, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am not inclined to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. is dismissed. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Chandan/35