CRLMB/5579/2026 of AADESH ROKY @ KALU @ SACHIN S/O RAMOTAR @ DHARMPAL @ PABOODAN Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN

[2026:RJ-JP:17402] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5578/2026 1. Suresh Kumar @ Gaboor @ Gabbar Singh S/o Dayal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Achrol, Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present In Confined In Sub Jail Khetri, Jhunjhunu). 2. Pintu @ Bachiya S/o Babulal @ Kamlesh, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Sundarpura, Police Station Kotputli, District Koputli, At Present Nivi Sawalpura, Police Station Thoi, District Sikar Rajasthan (At Present In Confined In Sub Jail Khetri, Jhunjhunu). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5579/2026 Aadesh Roky @ Kalu @ Sachin S/o Ramotar @ Dharmpal @ Paboodan, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Sundarpura, Police Station Kotputli, District Kotputli, At Present Nivi Sawalpura, Police Station Thoi, District Sikar Rajasthan (At Present In Confined In Sub Jail Khetri, Jhunjhunu). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Kumar Saini Mr. Prashant Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA Order 24/04/2026 1. These bail applications have been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with [2026:RJ-JP:17402] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5578/2026] FIR No. 28/2026 registered at Police Station Buhana, District Jhunjhunu for the offence(s) under Section 303(2) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case; charge-sheet is proposed to be filed; He also submits that petitioners are behind the bars since long; recovery has already been effected from the petitioners. He further submits that petitioners are not required for further investigation; conclusion of trial may take a long time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars and, therefore, prays that the petitioners may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS. 3. Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail applications and submits that there are criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioners. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that charge-sheet is proposed to be filed; that accused-petitioners are behind the bars since long; recovery has already been effected from the petitioners; that accused-petitioners are not required for further investigation; 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 petitioners on bail. 5. Therefore, these bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioners Suresh Kumar @ Gaboor @ Gabbar Singh S/o Dayal, Pintu @ Bachiya S/o Babulal @ Kamlesh and Aadesh Roky @ Kalu @ Sachin S/o Ramotar @ Dharmpal @ Paboodan are ordered to be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal [2026:RJ-JP:17402] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5578/2026] 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 other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence on 1st and 15th day of every month in the concerned police station. 7. In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, 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. 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),J SHIVANI/58-59