[2026:RJ-JP:12446] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2944/2026 Nandsingh Sisodia @ Motisingh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 70 Years, R/o House No. 117, Ganesh Nagar, Nangal Jaisa Bohra, Murlipura Jaipur Presently Tenant Flat No. 38 Manglam City Govind Sarovar, Police Station Kalwar Jaipur. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Adv. with Mr. Avi Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 24/03/2026 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.303/2025 registered at Police Station Sadar Jaipur, District Jaipur (West) for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is submitted that co- accused namely, Amit Sharma has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court vide order dated 13.01.2026. It is submitted that the trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.09.2025 and [2026:RJ-JP:12446] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2944/2026] further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner. It is submitted that serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner of cheating by presenting fake sureties and producing forged surety bonds. It is submitted that in connivance with a group of persons involved in providing fake sureties, the petitioner, on 23.10.2024, presented fake sureties as well as forged surety bonds on the basis of forged documents, before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Japiur. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender as apart from this case, 16 other cases have been registered against him therefore, benefit of bail should not be extended to him. 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 both the parties, especially considering the material available on record, as also considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate 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 proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Nandsingh Sisodia @ Motisingh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the [2026:RJ-JP:12446] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2944/2026] 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. 7. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, it is made clear that he 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 conclusion of the trial. It is further directed that the petitioner shall share his mobile number (in use) to the trial Court and Investigating Agency and he shall keep his mobile phone in active mode and he shall not switch off his mobile phone intentionally for longer period. 8. Concerned SHO shall enter attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. If any breach of these conditions is reported or comes to the notice of the Court, same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. 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 Manoj Solanki /77