[2026:RJ-JP:13371] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4724/2026 Pradeep Tanwar S/o Shri Vikram Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o House No. 98, Hanuman City, Ward No. 31, Indrapuri, Sanganer, Jaipur- 302022. (Presently Accused Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta, Adv., with Mr. Dharmendra Kumar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Vijay, Spl.P.P. with Mr. Amitabh Vijaywargiya, Adv., Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 30/03/2026 1. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.18/2025 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Jaipur (West) for offences punishable under Sections 318(4) & 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023, Sections 43 & 66 of Information Technology Act, 2008 and Section 10(1) of Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that co-accused persons namely, Nitesh Kumar, Naveen Saran, [2026:RJ-JP:13371] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4724/2026] Khushiram, Rupam Pachar, Ankit Kumar, Tinku Choudhary @ Guruji, Manish Kumar, Sumit Singh, Balbeer, Kashmeer Jhajhdiya, Deepak Kumar and Sandeep Kumar, Paramjeet, Jogendra Kumar @ Jogi, Manoj Yadav and Anoj Bijarnia @ Anuj Bijarnia have already been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by this Court. Counsel further submits that one of the co-accused namely, Praveen Yadav was granted benefit of bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He argues that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 12.03.2026 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He submits that there is serious allegation against the petitioner and co-accused namely- Jorawar Singh Meena has been denied benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and his SLP is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that co-accused persons have been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed [2026:RJ-JP:13371] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4724/2026] that accused-petitioner- Pradeep Tanwar S/o Shri Vikram Singh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh and Fifty Thousand only), out of which one must be furnished by his family member/close relative, 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. 7. 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/69