[2026:RJ-JP:992]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal 2^nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16666/2025 Raju Prasad S/o Narayanlal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Jaichandrapura, Police Station Raisar, District Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur, District Jaipur).

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Singh Shekhawat Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

09/01/2026

1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Raju Prasad S/o Narayanlal, seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.85/2025 dated 22.02.2025 registered at P.S. Samod, District – Jaipur Rural, for the offence under Section 318(4), 338, 326(3) and 61(2)(a) of BNS.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicant undertake not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that in the first bail application this Hon’ble Court has observed that the main accused is Dharam Pratap Singh and the present petitioner has acted in conspiracy with Dharam Pratap Singh. He further submits that the main accused Dharam Pratap Singh was arrested by the police on 23.09.2025 and was sent to judicial custody, however, during judicial custody he expired. He further submits that the material placed at the time of bail application of Dharam Pratap Singh reflects that there was a transaction between the complainant Sudarshan Singh and Dharam Pratap Singh. It is further submitted that a sum of ₹ 10 lakhs was transferred by way of RTGS (electronic transfer) to the account of the complainant. He also submits that Dharam Pratap Singh had registered a criminal case being FIR No. 412/2025 on 01.07.2025 at Police Station Jhotwara, against Bhavani Shankar, Sudarshan Singh and other persons including the present petitioner.

4. Learned counsel further refers to a notice sent by Dharam Pratap Singh through his counsel dated 21.04.2025 and the reply dated 06.05.2025 sent by the complainant Sudarshan through his counsel, and submits that there is no specific denial with regard to the transaction and payment of advance amount against the agreement to sell. He further submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and has nothing to do with the alleged transaction and has been falsely implicated by the complainant. It is further submitted that the role and involvement of the present petitioner is only of putting his signature on the document and that the petitioner is not a beneficiary. At last, it is submitted that the offence is triable by a Magistrate and that the petitioner is in custody since his arrest on 01.08.2025.

5. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by the Learned Public Prosecutor and Learned Counsel for the complainant. Learned Counsel for the complainant submits that the present petitioner is an eyewitness to the forged power of attorney as well as the forged will of the mother of the complainant. He further submits that the petitioner is part of an organized gang indulging in fabrication of false documents.

6. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record.

7. While considering the first bail application of the present petitioner on 25.09.2025, this Court observed as under:

“On basis of a complaint dated 22.02.2025 lodged at P.S. Samod, District Jaipur Rural about transfer of land by fabricated agreement to sell and power of attorney, a report is registered and matter is investigated. During investigation, police has recorded s