Allowed

Alam S/O Ratti v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Mar 2026CRLMB/1201/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two young accused in a cyber-fraud/cheating case sought bail under Section 483 BNSS after their bail was rejected by the sessions court. Charge-sheet filed, no recovery pending. The High Court allowed regular bail subject to stringent conditions covering bank accounts, digital devices and SIM cards.

What did the court decide?

Accused-petitioners Alam and Amir enlarged on bail under Section 483 BNSS on stringent conditions including asset disclosure, device and account listings, and periodic reporting to the IO.

Alam S/O Ratti Vs the State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:11323]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1201/2026

¶4

Alam S/o Ratti, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Uncheda, Police Station Jurhera, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg)

¶5

Amir S/o Abdur Rajak, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Khedlinanu, Police Station Jurhera, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Surendra Singh Mr. AnoopKumar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Vijay Yadav, P.P. with
	Mr. Shubham Sain,AAAG

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

¶12

Order

¶13

17/03/2026

¶14

1. This bail application has been filed by the petitioners Alam S/o Ratti & Amir S/o Abdur Rajak, aged about 20 years and 23 years respectively, who were arrested by the police in connection with the FIR No.384/2025 registered at Police Station Jurhera, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(5), 303(2), 308(2), 313 & 61(2) (a) of BNS and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act. The bail application of the petitioners was rejected by the Learned Additional Session Judge Kaman, District Deeg by order dated 15.01.2026.

[2026:RJ-JP:11323]

[CRLMB-1201/2026]

(2 of 4)

2. Learned counsel submitted that the Police after completing the investigation filed the charge-sheet and no recovery is required to be made. Learned counsel further submitted that the allegations levelled against the accused-petitioner are petty in nature. In view thereof, learned counsel prayed that the accusedpetitioner be enlarged on bail.

¶19

3. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application and informed this Court about the conduct of the accused-petitioners, which reflects that no complaints were registered against them on ‘1930’, also, no serious offences were involved.

¶20

4. This Court after considering the charge-sheet, nature of allegations as reported in the FIR, petitioners are behind the bar since long, overall facts and circumstances 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-petitioners Alam S/o Ratti & Amir S/o Abdur Rajak , on bail.

¶21

5. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners - Alam S/o Ratti & Amir S/o Abdur Rajak, shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶22

(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 which the accused-petitioners have in their name.

[2026:RJ-JP:11323]

[CRLMB-1201/2026]

(3 of 4)

(ii) The accused-petitioners 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.

¶27

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. 4. The accused-petitioners shall surrender his passport, if they have, before the trial Court immediately after being released on bail. The accused-petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the trial Court. 5. The accused-petitioners 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.

¶28

The accused-petitioners 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.

¶29

The accused-petitioners 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.

¶30

The accused-petitioners shall not create any social media account in the name of any person, domain name or website without the prior intimation to the Investigation Officer.

[2026:RJ-JP:11323]

[CRLMB-1201/2026]

(4 of 4)

The accused-petitioners 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.

¶35

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

¶36

The accused-petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer whenever called upon and shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

¶37

The accused-petitioners shall not tamper with evidence, influence witnesses or attempt to obstruct the investigation in any manner whatsoever.

¶38

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-petitioners are 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.

¶39

(RAVI CHIRANIA),J

¶40

Monika/Aman/43

Alam S/O Ratti v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alam S/O Ratti v. the 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

Sunil S/O Pokharram Vs State of Rajasthan

Naresh S/O Gel Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Guddu Yadav S/O Shyamlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vasudev S/O Suresh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Satyaveer @ Dhamas S/O Padam Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran Pinara Mansuri S/O Taj Mohammad @ Tajudeen Mansuri Vs State of Rajasthan