[2026:RJ-JP:17120] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 5918/2026 Prakash Chand Bishnoi @ Pappu S/o Shri Mohanlal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Janiyon Ki Dhani, Chitalwana, Police Station Chitalwala, District Jalore, Presently R/o Plot No. 62/63, Hanuman Nagar, Sanchore, Police Station Sanchore, District Jalore. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Sanchore). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Y.S. Jadoun, Adv., with Mr. Raju Ram, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN (Through Video Conferencing) Order 22/04/2026 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.22/2025 registered at Police Station Mokhampura, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. After completion of the investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has [2026:RJ-JP:17120] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-5918/2026] been filed during the course of trial thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot and later on, on the basis of police interrogation of the co-accused, he has been arrested. He further submits that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court. He argues that eleven other cases were mentioned in the impugned order; however, in two cases, the petitioner has been acquitted, and in the rest of the cases, he is on bail. He further argues that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2026 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender, as nine other cases of similar nature have been registered against him. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot; filing of charge-sheet; other co- accused persons have been granted benefit of bail by this Court and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the [2026:RJ-JP:17120] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-5918/2026] merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow this second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Prakash Chand Bishnoi @ Pappu S/o Shri Mohanlal 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. 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 first 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 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 [2026:RJ-JP:17120] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-5918/2026] concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/23