[2026:RJ-JP:23011] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8718/2026 Varis S/o Hakam, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Bheelamka, Police Station Deeg Kotwali, District Deeg. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail, Deeg) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sinsinwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.) Order 05/06/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 54/2026 registered at Police Station Nagar, District Deeg for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 313 and 61(2)(a) of BNS and under Section 66D of IT Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of some applications found installed in their mobile phones, which are capable of being used in the commission of cyber fraud; that charge-sheet has already been filed. He also submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since long; that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioner; that similar [2026:RJ-JP:23011] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8718/2026] situated co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail; conclusion of trial will take its own time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused-petitioner behind the bars and, therefore, prays that the accused-petitioner 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- petitioner hereinabove and concurs with the fact that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioner. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsels for both the parties; that the charge-sheet has already been filed; that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 26.02.2026; that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioner; that similar situated co-accused persons namely Soyab, Aasid, Jahul and Mubin have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 02.06.2026; trial will take its own time. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 5. Therefore, the instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS is accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioner Varis S/o Hakam is ordered to be released on bail, provided he 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 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. [2026:RJ-JP:23011] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8718/2026] 6. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve himself in any offence(s) during currency of the bail. 7. In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioner 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. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax, for necessary compliance. (SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.)),J 147/KAVISH