Sunil Kumar Pareek S/O Shri Radheyshyam Pareek Vs the State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:40846]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2^nd Bail Application No. 12866/2025

Sunil Kumar Pareek S/o Shri Radheyshyam Pareek, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Pareeko Ka Mohalla, Shrirampura, Police Station Naraina, District Jaipur Rural. (At Present Confined In Centraj Jail, Jaipur).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Anshuman Saxena, Adv., with Mr. Vishal Gurjar,Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP and
	Mr. Gopal Gupta, Adv., for complainant.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

08/10/2025

¶13

This second bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.226/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Jaipur, District Jaipur (West) (Raj.) for offences punishable under Sections 384, 406, 416, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 & 120B of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed chargesheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC.

¶14

The first bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by this court vide order dated 28.07.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail before the learned trial Court under the provisions of Section 480(6) of BNSS

(2 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:40846]

[CRLMB-12866/2025]

(corresponding to Section 437(6) of Cr.PC) however, charges have not been framed so far and trial has not commenced thus, this second bail application has been preferred.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that coaccused persons namely- Shankar Lal Sharma, Bhanwar Lal Sharma and Pooja have already been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court after considering the period of incarceration. Counsel submits that case of the petitioner is also on similar footing as he is not beneficiary of the transaction. It is contended that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 21.01.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. They submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender as five other cases have been registered against him out of which two cases are of similar nature.

¶21

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in two of the cases of similar nature, petitioner has already been granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

¶22

I have considered the contentions.

¶23

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

¶24

of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, especially considering the material available on record and the fact that aforementioned co-accused persons have already

[2025:RJ-JP:40846]

[CRLMB-12866/2025]

(3 of 4)

been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application.

¶29

This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Sunil Kumar Pareek S/o Shri Radheyshyam Pareek, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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.

¶30

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 in first week of every month in the concerned police station.

¶31

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

¶32