[2026:RJ-JP:22866] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4897/2026 1. Arbaz S/o Ramzan, aged about 20 Years, R/o Jotruhalla Police Station Gopalgarh District Deeg (Raj.) 2. Jilshad S/o Ramzan, aged about 22 Years, R/o Jotruhalla Police Station Gopalgarh District Deeg (Raj.) 3. Surjeet Singh S/o Iqbal Singh, aged about 19 Years, R/o Bhojpur Ka Bas Police Station Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present all are confined in Sub-Jail Deeg) ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, Through its Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5653/2026 Wasim Akram S/o Abdul Gafur, aged about 32 Years, R/o Khandiyawas, Police Station Gopalgadh, District Deeg, Rajasthan. (At Present confined in Deeg Jail). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Khan, Mr. Sabir Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.) Order 02/06/2026 1. These bail applications have been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection [2026:RJ-JP:22866] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-4897/2026] with FIR No. 30/2026 registered at Police Station Gopalgarh, District Deeg for the offence(s) under Section(s) 303(2), 317(2), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 308(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS and 66D of the Information Technology Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submit that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they are behind the bars since long. Learned counsel further submits that the offences are triable by Magistrate; charge-sheet has already been filed; trial will take its own time, two co-accused who are juveniles have already been enlarged on bail, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused- petitioners in custody and therefore, pray that the accused- petitioners may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused- petitioners hereinabove and submits that there is one more criminal antecedent registered against accused-petitioner Jilsad and Surjeet Singh each, therefore, the accused-petitioners may not be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of BNSS. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record in the form of copy of charge-sheet, considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the accused-petitioners and also the facts that the accused-petitioners are behind the bars since 27.02.2026; that the charge-sheet against the accused-petitioners has already been [2026:RJ-JP:22866] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-4897/2026] filed; that the trial is likely to take its own time and two co- accused who are juveniles have already been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide separate orders dated 02.04.2026 passed in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 631/2026 and 602/2026, and without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail. 5. Therefore, these bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are accordingly allowed and the accused-petitioners (i) Arbaz S/o Ramzan (ii) Jilshad S/o Ramzan (iii) Surjeet Singh S/o Iqbal Singh (iv) Wasim Akram S/o Abdul Gafur are ordered to be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that they 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. 6. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve themselves in any offence(s) during currency of the bail. 7. In case of any breach of the aforementioned condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. 8. 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. [2026:RJ-JP:22866] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-4897/2026] 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order forthwith to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax, for necessary compliance. (SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.)),J 96-97/SKS