[2026:RJ-JP:15138] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4431/2026 Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Mohan Lal Vishnoi, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Gajjewala, Tehsil Bajju, Police Station, Ranjitpura, District Bikaner, Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amogh Gupta for Mr. Harendar Neel For Respondent(s) : Mr. M. S. Shekhawat, PP with Mr. Atul Agre, Add. S.P. SOG, Jaipur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 10/04/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No. 685/2023 registered at Police Station Sanganer District Jaipur for the offence(s) under Sections 419, 420, 120B IPC and Sections 3, 7, 10 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the applicant is a young man aged 25 years. It is submitted that the applicant is behind bars ever since 20.08.2025. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and no recovery has been taken place. It is also submitted that as per counsel information, there is no criminal antecedent registered against hte applicant. Learned counsel further submits that the conclusion of [2026:RJ-JP:15138] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4431/2026] trial is likely to take a long time and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant behind bars till disposal of the case. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. Investigating Officer has marked presence and has submitted that unfair means are used on the part of the accused-applicant in public employment. It is further submitted that financial transaction and FSL report are supported the story of prosecution. It is submitted that there is criminal antecedent registered against the accused-applicant and that applicant's case is distinguishable from that of the co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail. 4. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that financial transaction and FSL report are supported the story of prosecution; that there is criminal antecedent registered against the accused- applicant; that unfair means are used on the part of the accused- applicant in public employment and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not inclined to allow the bail application of the accused-applicant and enlarge him on bail. 5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is dismissed. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /228