[2025:RJ-JP:11729] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11679/2024 1. Dhappu Kanwar W/o Shri Sanwat Singh, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Kareri, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Shyamlal Yadav S/o Shri Jhunthalal Yadav, Aged About 80 Years, R/o Kareri, Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tara Chand Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 12/03/2025 1. The instant pre-arrest bail application has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS filed on behalf of the petitioners, who are having apprehension of arrest in FIR No.51/2013 registered at Police Station Amarsar, District Jaipur (Rural), Rajasthan for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that during the course of investigation, offences were not found proved against the petitioners therefore, negative final report was submitted by the Investigating Agency on 26.06.2013. It is submitted that a protest petition was preferred by the complainant on 07.08.2013 which was kept pending consideration till December, 2023. It is submitted that vide order dated 19.12.2023, cognizance was taken by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and petitioners were summoned through bailable warrant. Counsel submits that there is reasonable [2025:RJ-JP:11729] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-11679/2024] apprehension in the mind of the petitioners that they might be sent to judicial custody on appearance as other co-accused persons who appeared before the learned trial court in pursuance of bailable warrant were sent to judicial custody. It is further submitted that petitioners are ready to face trial and judicial custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. He thus, prays that petitioners may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail in this matter. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioners, so also considering the fact that petitioners are ready to face the trial, this court deems it just and proper to dispose of this anticipatory bail application with a direction that petitioners shall appear before the concerned Court on or before 24.03.2025 and submit their bail bonds to the satisfaction of the said court. Concerned Court is directed to accept the bail bonds of the petitioners. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the instant criminal misc. bail application is disposed of. 7. It is made clear that this order will lose its currency in case the petitioners fail to appear before the learned trial Court on or before the given time. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /1015