##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:24260]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12725/2025

Ramdayal Suthar S/o Shri Kesharam Ji, Aged About 55 Years,

Ganesh Nagar, Sangaria, Jodhpur

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kshitij Vyas

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shreeram Choudhary, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

19/05/2026

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the

petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.

175/2025 registered at Police Station Basni, District Jodhpur City

West, for offences punishable under Sections 314, 318(4), 335,

336(1), 338, 336(3), 340(2), and 339 of the BNS. The present

bail application has been preferred under Section 482 of the

BNSS.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present

dispute arises out of a civil dispute regarding the sale of Plot No.

74. It is stated that an FIR had earlier been registered by

Ranchore Das, wherein the challan has already been filed.

Thereafter, another FIR was registered by Sampat Raj, husband of

Kisturi Devi, in which a negative final report has already been

filed, and a protest petition against the same is pending

consideration. It is further submitted that, on the same set of

(Uploaded on 19/05/2026 at 01:46:16 PM)

(Downloaded on 20/05/2026 at 09:00:24 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:24260] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12725/2025]

facts, the present FIR has now been lodged by Bhuma Ram

alleging fraud on the ground that the petitioner sold the land

without having any title over it.

Learned counsel submits that multiple FIRs have been

registered regarding the same dispute, which essentially pertains

to the ownership of Plot No. 74. He contends that the petitioner

possesses a patta in his favour, and the property had been sold to

him by Ranchore Das. It is argued that the matter is essentially

civil in nature, the litigation is already pending before the civil

court, and the entire case is based on documentary evidence. No

custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required, and the

petitioner is willing to submit all relevant documents before the

Investigating Officer. It is, therefore, argued that no fruitful

purpose would be served by sending the petitioner to judicial

custody. Accordingly, prayer has been made for grant of

anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. However, upon perusal of

the case diary, he is not in a position to dispute that the

investigation is still pending and that civil disputes between the

parties are also pending before the competent civil courts.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

This Court has considered the submissions advanced by

learned counsel for the petitioner. It is noticed that an earlier FIR

was registered by Ranchore Das, in which the challan has already

(Uploaded on 19/05/2026 at 01:46:16 PM)

(Downloaded on 20/05/2026 at 09:00:24 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:24260] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12725/2025]

been filed against the petitioner as well as Kisturi Devi. Thereafter,

another FIR came to be registered by the husband of Kisturi Devi,

being FIR No. 2/2025, in which a negative final report has been

filed. The dispute pertains to the sale of Plot No. 74.

The petitioner claims to possess a registered sale deed as

well as a patta in his favour. On the other hand, the complainant

also claims title on the basis of registered documents allegedly

executed by Ranchore Das. It is further noticed that the petitioner

has instituted a civil suit against Kisturi Devi before the Court of

Civil Judge No. 3, Jodhpur, which is presently pending

consideration.

The entire dispute revolves around the sale and purchase of

Plot No. 74 and is primarily based upon registered documents and

pattas. In such circumstances, particularly when a negative final

report has already been filed in one of the earlier FIRs and the

petitioner has already joined the investigation pursuant