Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8599 (RAJ)

SAIKUL S/O DALLA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/3229/2026 · 2026-06-05

Sangeeta Sharma V J

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:22982] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3228/2026 1. Barvaid @ Parvej S/o Ashu, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Bilond, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). 2. Azaruddin S/o Isra, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ladlaka, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3229/2026 Saikul S/o Dalla, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Undhan, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3230/2026 Nasar S/o Sahnaz, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Kalyanpur (Padpuri), Police Station Khoh, Presently Resident Of Chhichharwadi, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3394/2026 Barvaid @ Parvej S/o Aasu, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Bilond Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. (Present Confined At District Jail Deeg). ----Accused-Petitioner [2026:RJ-JP:22982] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-3228/2026] Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3395/2026 Sharif Khan S/o Innas, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Digcholi, Police Station Khoh, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4012/2026 Irfan S/o Taiyyab, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vilang, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Khan Mr. Ram Babu Sharma Mr. Ankit Khandelwal Mr. Parvez For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.) Order 05/06/2026 1. These instant bail applications have been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 53/2026 registered at Police Station Kaman, District Deeg for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), [2026:RJ-JP:22982] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-3228/2026] 338, 336(3), 340(2), 111(2)(a) & 61(2) of B.N.S. and Section 66D of IT Act. 2. On instructions, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner Barvaid @ Parvej submits that he wants to withdraw S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3228/2026 qua accused- petitioner Barvaid @ Parvej. 3. In view of the above, this S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3228/2026 is dismissed as withdrawn qua accused-petitioner Barvaid @ Parvej. 4. Learned counsels for the accused-petitioners submit that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of some applications found installed in their mobile phones related to cyber fraud. They also submit that the accused- petitioners are in custody since long. They further submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed and there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioners; that co- accused person who is juvenile, has already been enlarged on bail; the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; conclusion of trial will take its own time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused-petitioners behind the bars and, therefore, pray that the accused-petitioners may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions advanced by learned counsels for the accused- petitioners hereinabove but concurs with the fact that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioners. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, material available before the Court in the form of charge-sheet [2026:RJ-JP:22982] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-3228/2026] and the arguments advanced by learned counsels for both the parties; that the accused-petitioners are in judicial custody since 01.02.2026; that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioners; that co-accused person, who is juvenile has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.04.2026 in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 532/2026; that the 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-petitioners on bail. 7. Therefore, these instant bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioners (i) Azaruddin S/o Isra (ii) Saikul S/o Dalla (iii) Nasar S/o Sahnaz (iv) Barvaid @ Parvej S/o Aasu (v) Sharif Khan S/o Innas (vi) Irfan S/o Taiyyab 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. 8. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve themselves in any offence(s) during currency of the bail. 9. 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. [2026:RJ-JP:22982] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-3228/2026] 10. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. 11. 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 30-35/SHIVANI