IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.6532/2010 Mukesh Kumar Yadav Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : 22/07/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Anil Upman for accused petitioner Mr. Amit Poonia, Public Prosecutor for State ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me. Contention of the learned counsel for the accused petitioner is that in the present case, subject-matter of investigation into FIR No.18/2008 at Police Station SOG, Jaipur was exactly the same which was the basis in earlier FIR No.702/2008 for the same offence lodged at Police Station Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. It is alleged against the petitioner that he created a false e-mail I.D. in the name of S.P. (Crime), Jaipur City, Jaipur on the domain of 'g.mail.com' and by using that e- mail ID, he used to requisition call details of various subscribers from different cellphone service providers. Learned counsel submitted that already petitioner was arrested in the earlier case and thereafter about one month, he was granted bail. In the present case, he has again been arrested on 22/6/2010 and since then he is in jail. There is nothing new material or evidence because all that which is now being investigated by the Police Station SOG was earlier inquired into by the Police Station Malviya Nagar, Jaipur which had already filed challan against the petitioner. Petitioner could not be arrested second time for the same offence. All that has come on record is that petitioner was charging some amount from those, who were interested in obtaining call details of someone and providing them such information but it is not shown that petitioner has got any such information in respect of any government functionary etc. He would undertake not to indulge in similar offence in future. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications. Considering the rival submissions and without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case but taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail during trial. Resultantly, the bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Mukesh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Yadav shall be released on bail in F.I.R. No.18/2008 of P.S. SOG, Jaipur for offence u/Ss.420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and S.72 of the IT Act on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till conclusion of the trial. However, in case the petitioner is again found indulging in similar or any other offence at any point of time in future, the bail granted to him by this court in the present case, would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of the prosecution on this ground alone and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in the bail bonds produced by the petitioner, and the sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by the Tehsildar of the area concerned. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil