SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 18772

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
OM PRAKASH MEENA S/O SHRI AMAR LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 10906 / 2025



[2025:RJ-JP:40070]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10906/2025 Om Prakash Meena S/o Shri Amar Lal, R/o 20, Ganesh Vihar Agra Road Jaipur, President House No. 31A, Shri Ganesh Vihar, Agra Road, Police Station Jamdoli, Jaipur, At Present In The Judicial Custody In Central Jai, Jaipur.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hora with Mr. G.P. Sharma Mr. Mahesh Chand Gupta Mr. Sahaj Veer Baweja For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Mahendra Shandilya HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

25/09/2025

1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Om Prakash Meena S/o Shri Amar Lal seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.38/2017 dated 11.02.2017 registered at P.S. Jyoti Nagar District – Jaipur South, for the offence under Sections

420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits 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 also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with trial, which will take time.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on

17.01.2015, the present petitioner and Geeta Devi (complainant in FIR No.73/2015 PS Masalpur, District Karauli) has filed nomination for post of Sarpanch of Panchayat Ratiapura and after election the present petitioner was elected as Sarpanch on 18.01.2015. He further submits that defeated candidate Geeta Devi has filed a criminal complaint before the Court of Magistrate alleging that the present petitioner has concealed birth of third child born on 27.10.2008 at Government Satellite Hospital, Sethi Colony, Jaipur and further birth certificate was issued by Nagar Nigam (Moti Dongri Zone). He submits that after investigation, police has filed a charge-sheet for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 417 and 193 of IPC but on a revision petition, learned Additional Sessions Judge has set aside the order to frame charge and remitted back the matter and present petitioner was discharged from offence under Section 420, 467, 468, and 471 of IPC. He also submits that the present petitioner was charged under Sections 417 and 193 of IPC and thereafter the present petitioner was tried only for offence under Sections 417 and 193 of IPC and he was found guilty on 29.03.2025. He submits that against said judgment, an appeal is filed and same is pending for consideration before the Appellate Court. He also submits that an election petition was filed in February, 2015 and same was also disposed of. He further submitted that defeated candidate Geeta Devi and her husband Rishikesh instigated complainant Om Prakash to file a complaint on the ground that present petitioner created false documents to create defence in cases against him and registered a criminal case against the present petitioner on same charges for which the petitioner accused was already tried and convicted. He further submitted that now after investigation, police has already filed a charge-sheet and the present petitioner accused is in custody since 08.08.2025 and the offence is triable by the Magistrate.

4. Learned counsel has referred judgments in cases of T.T.

Antony Vs. State of Kerala :(2001) 6 SCC 181, Amitbhai Anitchandara Shah Vs. CBI :(2013) 6 SCC 348 and submitted that second FIR based on same set of facts and cause of action, is barred and continuation of proceedings under second FIR amounts to a clear abuse of process of law. He referred the facts narrated by complainant Om Prakash and submitted that the present complainant is instigated by Rishikesh, who is husband of Geeta Bai. He submitted that the documents as referred in FIR and also the affidavit as submitted in the name of Om Prakash cannot be considered as forged documents. He referred judg

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top