[2026:RJ-JP:13827] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.236/2026 Vikas S/o Babulal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Rijoda Police Station Aligarh, District Tonk (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Sawai Madhopur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Chaudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 02/04/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.381/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Sawaimadhopur, District Sawai Madhopur for the offence(s) under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 112(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 13 of the RPGO and Section 66-D of I.T. Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that the charge-sheet has already been submitted, and apart from the statement of the Police official, there is no substantive evidence available on record, implicating the accused petitioner in the alleged offence of cyber fraud. It is further contended that the concerned Investigating Officer did not even [2026:RJ-JP:13827] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-236/2026] endevour to record the statements of the victims, who allegedly registered the complaint against the petitioner on the cyber portal. It is also submitted that in the absence of any substantive evidence, prima facie, it cannot be said that the petitioner has committed an offence under Section 318(4) of BNS read with Section 66-D of IT Act. It is also contended that the accused- petitioner is in custody since 21.12.2025, there are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and fairly concedes that the Investigating Officer did not record the statements of the complainant who filed the complaint against the petitioner alleging commission of cyber fraud or cheating. However, it is argued that in the investigation it was found that in the petitioner's account, an amount of Rs.91000/- was deposited, therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. The Investigating Officer did not record the statements of the complainants, who allegedly filed complaint against the petitioner on cyber portal, complaining commission of offence of cyber fraud with them. The accused-petitioner is in custody since long, there are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. [2026:RJ-JP:13827] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-236/2026] 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Vikas S/o Babulal, in connection with FIR No.381/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Sawaimadhopur, District Sawai Madhopur, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-29