[2026:RJ-JP:13372]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4758/2026 Malikhan Singh Yadav Son Of Sovaram Singh, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Jawaharpur, Post Pilua, District Etah, UP (The Petitioner Is Behind The Bars At Central Jail, Jaipur).

----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ambrish Vashishtha, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP with Mr. Devi Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

30/03/2026

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.151/2024 registered at Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that co-accused, who was found in possession of illicit liquor, has already been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He further submits that the petitioner has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of fact that vehicle in which co-accused was carrying illicit liquor is registered on the name of the petitioner. He argues that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 06.02.2026 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. She submits that there are two criminal antecedents against the petitioner out of which one is of similar nature.

4. I have considered the contentions.

5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that co-accused, who was found in possession of illicit liquor, has been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Malikhan Singh Yadav Son Of Sovaram Singh shall be released on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned 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.

7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence once in every three months in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.

8. Concerned SHO shall record the presence of the petitioner in Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

9. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.

10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance.

11. 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.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/70