[2026:RJ-JD:14220]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1130/2026 Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Mandali, P.s. Sadar Pali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramdev Rajpurohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. V.S. Rajpurohit, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

1.	Date of Conclusion of Arguments	19.02.2026
2.	Date on which Judgment was Reserved	19.02.2026
	3. Whether the full Judgment or only the Operative part was pronounced	Operative part
4.	Date of pronouncement	28.03.2026

The present criminal misc. petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 19.05.2025 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate and Tehsildar, Pali under Section 129 BNSS directing the petitioner to execute a bond for maintaining peace for a period of

12 months.

The brief facts of the case are that proceedings were initiated on a complaint filed by the then S.H.O., under Section 129 BNSS alleging that the petitioner is a habitual offender and that preventive action was necessary to maintain public peace within the district. The learned Trial Court, relying upon the report and antecedents placed on record, passed the impugned order dated 19.05.2025. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order, has approached this Court challenging its legality and propriety.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that complaint under Section 129 BNSS has been filed by the agency out of malice and without placing proper and complete information before the learned trial court. Counsel further submits that though a list of antecedents was produced, the petitioner has been acquitted in almost all the cases and only one case is stated to be pending against him. Despite this, the learned trial court has arbitrarily treated the petitioner as a habitual offender and passed the impugned order.

On behalf of State, a formal reply to the petition is submitted as well as a detailed report dated 20.02.2026 is placed on record for consideration before the Court which was sent by SHO, Police Station, Sadar Pali District Pali. In order to justify initiation of proceeding under Section 129 BNSS, SHO has made an endeavour to highlight the conduct of the petitioner and his alleged criminal activities to label him as a habitual offender. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

The details about the cases registered against the petitioner, and the outcome/status of these cases is incorporated in the report filed by the State which reads as under:-

Øl a

e q- u- @o”kZ

/kkjk

uke Fkkuk

pktZ”khV ua- fnukad

Ukke U;k;ky;

fu.kZ; U;k;ky ;@ vkxkeh rkjh[k is”kh

The definition of habitual offender envisaged under Section

2(a) of the Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act, 1953 reads as under:-

“2. (a) ‘habitual offender’ means a person who, during any continuous period of five years, whether before or after the 15th day of September, 1952or partly before and partly after the said date, has been sentenced on conviction on not less than three occasions since he attained the age of eighteen years to a substantive terms of imprisonment for any one or more of the scheduled offences committed on different occasions and not so connected together as to form parts of the same transaction, such sentence not having been reversed in appeal or revision.

Provided that in computing the continuous period of five years referred to above any period spent in jail either under a sentence of imprisonment or under detention shall not be taken into account”

Upon examining the definition of habitual offender as quoted above it is seen that a person can only be treated as a habitual offender if he is sentenced or convicted or not less than three occasions. However, in the present case, based upon the report submit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document