[2025:RJ-JP:39091] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 10837/2025 1. Pawan Singh Dayma S/o Santram Dayma, R/o Alampur- Ki-Dhani, Bhiwadi, Tehsil Tapukada, District Khairthal Tijara, Rajasthan. 2. Ashish Kumar S/o Jai Singh Yadav, R/o House No. 108/60, Niranjan Colony, Maheshwari, District Rewadi Haryana. 3. Krishna Kumar S/o Prabhati Lal, R/o Village Nangal Raniya, Tehsil Mundawar, Balluwas, Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asgar Khan Mr. Junaid Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 23/09/2025 1. Petitioners have filed this second anticipatory bail application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No.692/2023 registered with the Police Station, Bhiwadi, District Bhiwadi for offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120-B & 506 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the matter. The dispute pending between the parties has already been settled, hence, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:39091] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10837/2025] Therefore, the petitioners may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the Full Bench judgment of the Court passed in case of Ganesh Raj Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. RLR 2005(2) 128 (F.B. Cr. Misc. Second Bail Application No.783/2005) decided on 01.04.2005. He has also placed reliance upon the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in case of Praveen Kumar Jadon Vs. State of Raj. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail No.2818/2018) decided on 10.04.2018 & Aditya @ Bhupendra @ Guddu Vs. State of Raj. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.16444/2024) decided on 03.01.2025. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Heard. 5. Considered. 6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Gurvinder Singh Vs. Jasbir Singh @ Jasvir Singh & Anr. In Criminal Appeal No. ------of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.3843/2025, decided on 15.09.2025, observed as under:- “6. Having Considered the matter in depth, we find substance in the contention of learned counsel for the appellant. 7. The learned Single Judge, after having passed an order dismissing the prayer for anticipatory bail, could not have revived the proceedings, much less by way [2025:RJ-JP:39091] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10837/2025] of restoration. The Court could not have then proceeded to reverse its earlier order by allowing the prayer for anticipatory bail which was initially rejected. 8. Accordingly, the order impugned dated 07.02.2025 stands set aside. The initial order dated 17.01.2025, dismissing the application and prayer for anticipatory bail, stands revived. 9. Consequences to follow. The parties are left open to avail the remedies as may be available to them in law.” 7. In view of the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Gurvinder Singh(supra), this Court is not inclined to entertain the second anticipatory bail application of the petitioners. 8. Accordingly, the present second anticipatory bail application is dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /10