[2026:RJ-JP:13865] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 4966/2026 1. Khalid S/o Rasid, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Kaithwada, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg (Rajasthan) 2. Billadeen S/o Ikbal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Thalchana, Police Station Jurhara, District Deeg (Rajasthan) (At Present Accused Petitioners Confined In Sub-Jail Deeg). ----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aman Kumar for Mr. Rakesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 02/04/2026 1. This second bail application has been filed by the accused- petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No.03/2026 registered at Police Station Kaithwara, District Deeg for offence(s) under Section(s) 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 303(2), 317(2), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2)(a) BNS and Section 66-D of IT Act. 2. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh, after filing of charge-sheet. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in [2026:RJ-JP:13865] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4966/2026] this case and petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. Learned counsel also submits that there are only two cases pending against petitioner Khalid, however, there is no criminal antecedent against petitioner Billadeen. He further submits that the petitioners are in custody since 06.01.2026 and no recovery is required to be made from them; therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in custody, hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the said offences involve serious cyber fraud activity. He further submits that there is one complaint against petitioner Khalid on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP). Hence, benefit of bail should not be granted to the petitioners. 5. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the rival arguments, the fact that investigation has been completed; charge-sheet has been filed, petitioners are in custody since long and conclusion of trial will take considerable long time, without commenting anything on the merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 6. Therefore, this second bail application is allowed and accused-petitioners (1) Khalid S/o Rasid and (2) Billadeen S/o Ikbal are ordered to be released on bail, provided, each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, [2026:RJ-JP:13865] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4966/2026] with the stipulation that the petitioners shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. The accused-petitioners are directed to mark their presence before the concerned Police Station on the 20th date of every month till conclusion of trial. The SHO of the concerned Police Station shall forward petitioners' attendance report to the trial Court on the same day of each month. 8. In case of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be at liberty to move an application against the petitioners for cancellation of bail before the concerned Court. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J SKS/1