Allowed

Mohin S/O Akram Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Sept 2026CRLMB/10014/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail application filed by Mohin S/o Akram Khan arrested under various Sections of BNS 2023 and IT Act. Court allowed bail directing disclosure of assets, digital records, and social media accounts as conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to conditions including bond, asset disclosure, digital restriction, and regular police reporting.

Mohin S/O Akram Khan Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:35204]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10014/2026 CNR: RJHC020599452026 | URN: CRLMB / 18594U / 2026

¶4

Mohin S/o Akram Khan, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Alamshah, Police Station Sikari, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

¶11

Order

¶12

01/09/2026

¶13

This criminal miscellaneous bail application has been filed by the petitioner Mohin S/o Akram Khan, under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023, who was arrested by the police in connection with the FIR No.166/2026 registered at Police Station Nagar, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 313 of BNS, 2023 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2008.

¶14

2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and there are no serious allegations against him on '1930' portal and even the Police during the investigation failed to find any commission of offence against him. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been just dragged in the present case and the allegations levelled against

(2 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:35204]

[CRLMB-10014/2026]

the him are petty in nature. In view thereof, learned counsel prays that the accused-petitioner be enlarged on bail.

¶19

3. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposes the bail application and informed this Court about the conduct of the accused-petitioner, which reflects that no similar kind of complaints were registered against him on ‘1930’.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the contents of the FIR. 5. This Court, after considering the nature of allegations as reported in the FIR, noticing the fact that the petitioner is behind the bars since long, no serious allegations on '1930' were found against him and without commenting upon merits of the matter, is inclined to exercise its power under Section 483 B.N.S.S. and deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Mohin S/o Akram Khan shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶21

Each of the accused-petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of ₹1,00,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureties of ₹50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

¶22

Within 15 days from the date of this order, the accused-petitioner shall file an affidavit before the trial Court/ I.O. disclosing the following details: -

¶23

(i) Movable and immovable assets which includes land, buildings, vehicles, deposits, investments all bank accounts and digital wallets, UPI IDs cryptocurrency holdings etc. allegedly used in commission of the offence or

(3 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:35204]

[CRLMB-10014/2026]

which the accused-petitioners have in their name.

¶28

(ii) The accused-petitioner shall submit complete transaction statements of all of their active bank accounts, UPI IDs and digital payment instruments etc. after every 30 days till completion of the trial to the IO.

¶29

The accused shall not obtain/use any new SIM card, mobile phone or open new bank account etc. without the prior intimation to the Investigating Officer.

¶30

The accused-petitioner shall surrender their passport, if they have, before the trial Court immediately after being released on bail. The accused-petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the trial Court.

¶31

The accused-petitioner shall not use any Virtual Private Network (VPN), TOR Browser, Proxy Server or any other form of anonymous network or identity masking technology without permission of IO.

¶32

The accused-petitioner shall submit to the Investigation Officer a comprehensive list of all electronic devices in their possession, including mobile phones, laptops, tablets, external hard disks and pen drive along with their IMEI numbers and serial numbers within 15 days of release under this bail order.

¶33

The accused-petitioner shall provide to the Investigating Officer details of all social media accounts, e-mail accounts, domain registration, websites and online platforms operated or used by the accused-petitioners.

¶34

The accused-petitioner shall not create any account on social media in the name of any person,

(4 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:35204]

[CRLMB-10014/2026]

domain name or website without the prior intimation to the Investigation Officer.

¶39

The accused-petitioner shall mark their presence before the concerned police station once in 15 days as fixed by the Investigating Officer and a register shall be maintained for the same by Investigating Officer.

¶40

In case of any change of residential address, the accused-petitioner shall immediately inform the Investigating Officer as well as the trial Court.

¶41

The accused-petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called upon and shall fully co-operate with the investigation. 12. The accused-petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence witnesses or attempt to obstruct the investigation in any manner whatsoever.

¶42

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, failure to provide above information or such other information as desired by IO, shall be treated as a violation of the bail conditions, & further if the accused-petitioner is found to be involved in similar such cases within three years from the date of passing of this order, the public prosecutor shall move an application for cancellation of bail.

¶43

(RAVI CHIRANIA),J

¶44

58/Monika

Mohin S/O Akram Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohin S/O Akram Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases