##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:4158]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 708/2026

Ranvir Singh S/o Madan Lal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Panlava,

Tehsil Lamangarh, Police Station Balara, District Sikar (Raj.), At

Present Resident Of 103-B, Kateva Nagar, New Sanganer Road,

Jaipur (Raj.). (At Present Lodged In District Jail, Sikar).

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan, through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg assisted by Mr. Sahil

Sharma & Mr. Nonit Hatila

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, Public

Prosecutor

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Order

29/01/2026

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483

of BNSS, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with

FIR No.118/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar Sikar, District

Sikar for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 IPC and Sections

4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes

(Banning) Act, 1978 and Sections 3 & 21 of the Banning of

Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.

2. Heard.

3. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the

petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused

the material made available on record.

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 04:26:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:18:53 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:4158] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-708/2026]

4. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner submits that in

the FIR, it is alleged by the complainant that the accused by

misleading the him has taken money in the name of investment

and for certain duration they gave benefits accruing from the

investment but lateron they stopped making the payment. It is

further submitted that there is no allegation against the accused-

petitioner in the FIR and has been implicated.

5. It is further submitted that the accused-petitioner is in

custody in this particular case since 24.10.2024 and out of total

12 witnesses only 4 have been examined so far. It is also

submitted that the accused-petitioner is languishing in jail since

long without there being any effective progress in the trial.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail

application and submits that there are large number of other

criminal cases pending against the accused-petitioner.

7. In rejoinder to the submissions of learned Public Prosecutor,

counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that all the cases as

referred by learned Public Prosecutor are in relation to the

investment by separate persons and therefore, on lodging the FIR

by each investors, the number of cases have gone up. He also

submits that in many of the criminal cases the accused-petitioner

has been enlarged on bail and in some of the criminal cases, the

FIRs have been quashed by the High Court.

8. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the

petitioner and so also the fact that the accused-petitioner is in

custody since 24.10.2024 and out of 12 prosecution witnesses

only 4 have been examined so far and the fact that there is no

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 04:26:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:18:53 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:4158] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-708/2026]

specific allegation against the present accused-petitioner in the

FIR, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits or

demerits of the case deems just and proper to enlarge the

accused-petitioner on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is

allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above

shall be enlarged on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in

the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties of

Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for

his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of

hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

Ashish Kumar /104

(Uploaded on 31/01/2026 at 04:26:35 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:18:53 AM)