[2026:RJ-JP:22890] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3661/2026 Kalu @ Akheyraj S/o Shri Harisingh, Age About 35 Years, R/o Jareli Police Station Malpura, Tonk District Tonk (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Tonk) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Kumar Verma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.) Order 03/06/2026 1. This bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused- petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 152/2025 registered at Police Station Uniara, District Tonk for the offence(s) under Sections 305(a) & 331(4) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since long; that charge-sheet has already been filed against the accused-petitioner; 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 the learned counsel for the accused- [2026:RJ-JP:22890] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-3661/2026] petitioner and submits that twenty-seven criminal cases of similar nature were registered against the accused-petitioner during the period from 2008 to 2021. So, the accused-petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of bail under Section 483 BNSS. 4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the material available before this Court in the form of the charge- sheet, and the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that twenty-seven criminal cases have been consistently registered against the accused-petitioner in a span of 13 years, some of the criminal cases registered against the accused-petitioner are of similar nature (housebreaking at night and committing theft in a dwelling house) and others related to serious nature of offences i.e. under Sections 392, 376, 302, 396 IPC etc; this shows his consistent indulgence in criminal activities. Hence, without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, and keeping in view the criminal record of the accused-petitioner, this Court does not deem it fit to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail at this stage. 5. Accordingly, this present Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application is dismissed. 6. 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. (SANGEETA SHARMA (V.J.)),J 47/SHIVANI