[2025:RJ-JP:20125] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1507/2025 Mukesh Kumar Son Of Manohar Lal, Resident Of Bada Kua Tan Dhana, Police Station Singhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Fateh Chand For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 12/05/2025 1. The petitioner has moved this Criminal Misc. Petition for quashing and set aside the order dated 04.02.2023, whereby, the petitioner's exemption application was dismissed and his bail bonds stands forfeited. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter was posted for appearance of accused on 03.12.2023. The matter could not be taken up on 03.12.2023 as the Ministrial staff was on strike. The petitioner was unaware to the fact that he has to appear on 04.02.2023. Therefore, considering the above facts, the order of dismissal of the petitioner's exemption application and forfeiture of his bail bonds may be set aside. 3. Heard and perused the material available on record. 4. Vide order dated 22.11.2022, learned counsel for the petitioner was specifically instructed to present the petitioner before the Court as the matter was posted for charge arguments [2025:RJ-JP:20125] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1507/2025] on 03.12.2023. The record shows that the matter pertains to year 2020 and due to absence of the petitioner, the charge could not be framed. The Court specifically instructed the counsel for the petitioner to present the accused on next date of hearing i.e. 03.12.2023. The matter could not be taken up by the Court on 03.12.2023 as ministerial staff were on mass Leave. The matter was taken up on the next date of hearing i.e. 04.02.2024, though in the order-sheet, the date has been inadvertently mentioned as 04.02.2023. On 04.02.2024, the petitioner did not appear before the Court and submitted an application for exemption. The petitioner continuously remained absent and trial could not be proceeded against the petitioner as the Court could not framed amd read over the charges. The record also shows that the petitioner remained absent on 20.09.2021 and arrest warrant was issued against him. On 11.07.2022, the petitioner was declared absconder and proceedings under Section 446 of Cr.P.C., were initiated against him, thereafter, on 13.09.2022, the petitioner was given benefit of bail, thus, the record is enough to exhibit that the petitioner deliberately remained absent and despite of instructions to the counsel to the petitioner, he failed to appear before the concerned Court. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to allow the criminal misc. petition. 5. Hence, the criminal misc. petition is hereby, dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/109