[2026:RJ-JP:14880]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3831/2026 Mukesh Kumar Rohilla S/o Sanwarmal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Panch Batti, Police Station Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu, Presently R/o Plot No. 156 A, Alkapuri, Niwaru Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur. Presently Confined In Central Jail Jaipur.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Kumar Mr. Harshit Kakani For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav,PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

Order

09/04/2026

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 766/2022 registered at Police Station Kardhani District Jaipur (West) for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 384 and 120-B of IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that, after submission of the charge-sheet, charges were framed on 23.09.2025; however, out of 17 cited witnesses, none has been examined. It is further contended that, in a case of similar nature registered against the petitioner, i.e., FIR No. 216/2025 dated 09.05.2025 registered at Vidhyadhar Police Station, the petitioner was granted bail vide order dated

01.04.2026. Learned counsel further submits that the accused- petitioner is in custody since 27.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that petitioner has cheated the complainant and procure a huge amount in his account. The investigation reveals that petitioner after misrepresenting himself as owner of the plot assured the complainant to grant him Patta, however the investigating agency concluded that land mentioned in the agreement executed by the petitioner belongs to some other person and complainant has transferred huge amount in the account of the present petitioner. It is also contended that there are similar nature of offences registered against the petitioner, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner deserves to be dismissed.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record.

5. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the long incarceration of the petitioner and the fact the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused-petitioner are triable by Magistrate, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Mukesh Kumar Rohilla S/o Sanwarmal, in connection with FIR No. 766/2022 registered at Police Station Kardhani District Jaipur (West) shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- 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. The concerned trial Judge shall verify the address and contact details of the sureties through concerned SHO before releasing the accused-petitioners on bail.

7. The accused is also directed to mark his presence on 7th and 25th of every month till conclusion of trial before the concerned police station. The SHO of the concerned police station shall send the presence report of the accused petitioner on the same day to the trial court every month. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.

8. The accused-petitione