[2026:RJ-JP:12983] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4673/2026 Ranvir Singh S/o Madanlal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Panlava Tehsil Laxmanghar, Police Station Balaran, District Sikar Raj., Currently Resident Of 103 B Katewa Nagar, New Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur, Raj. (At Present Lodged In District Jail, Sikar). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vaishnavi, Adv., with Ms. Aditi Meena, Adv., for Mr. Ashvin Garg, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/03/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.55/2023 registered at Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 & 120-B of IPC, Sections 4, 5 & 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and Sections 3 & 21 of Banning of Unregulated Deposits Schemes Act, 2019. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that it appears from the impugned order, [2026:RJ-JP:12983] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4673/2026] that 24 other FIRs have been registered against the petitioner with regard to similar allegations, however, some of the FIRs have already been quashed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Counsel submits that co-accused namely, Nagarmal has been granted benefit of bail by this Court. She argues that though, in this case arrest of the petitioner has been made on 12.06.2025, but in fact, he is in custody since 17.03.2023 in relation to another FIR. She contends that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that 24 other FIRs have been registered against the petitioner and he is in custody in other cases. 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 learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that co-accused namely, Nagarmal has been granted benefit of bail by this Court; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, 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- Ranvir Singh S/o Madanlal shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) together with two [2026:RJ-JP:12983] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4673/2026] 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. 7. It is made clear that after being released in all the cases, 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. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. 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. 9. If any breach of these conditions is reported or comes to the notice of the Court, the 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 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/67