HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2727/2025 Ramesh Son Of Balbir, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Mahipur (185), Sonipat, Haryana. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshit Mittal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/11/2025 1. By way of fling the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh, Ajmer, by which the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. for converting the arrest warrants into bailable warrants has been rejected. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is facing trial for the offences under Sections 407 and 120-B IPC along with co-accused persons before the Court below and he was appearing before the said Court. He further submits that the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the Trial Court assured the petitioner that his presence is not required and under the said bona fide, he did not appear before the Trial Court and consequently, his bail bonds were fortified on 07.04.2015. Counsel submits that the petitioner (2 of 4) [CRLMP-2727/2025] was not aware about the pendency of the aforesaid case. He came to know about the same only after receiving the information that arrest warrants have been issued against him. Counsel submits that immediately thereafter, an application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. was submitted, but the same was rejected by the Court below on 06.03.2025. Counsel submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to face the trial and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty in case his prayer for conversion of arrest warrants into bailable warrants is allowed. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner failed to appear before the Trial Court on 07.04.2015, hence his bail bonds were forfeited and arrest warrants were issued against him. He further submits that the petitioner is absconding since last more than 10 years, due to which the trial has been hampered, hence the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief and the petition is liable to be rejected. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that a charge-sheet under Sections 407 and 120-B IPC has been submitted against the petitioner along with co-accused persons in the year 2014. On the fateful day i.e. on 07.04.2015, the matter was listed before the Trial Court and the petitioner failed to appear before the Trial Court, hence under these circumstances, his bail bonds were forfeited and arrest warrants were issued against the petitioner. This fact is not in dispute that more (3 of 4) [CRLMP-2727/2025] than 10 years have passed and the entire proceedings of the Trial Court have been hampered since last more than a decade. However, looking to the fact that the petitioner submitted an undertaking before this Court stating that he will appear before the Trial Court as and when required and not commit the same mistake which was committed earlier. 6. Considering overall facts and circumstances of the case, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of with the following directions: (I) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.11,000/- (Rupess Eleven Thousand only) with the litigants funds and the same would be utilized by the Trial Court in the interest of poor and needy litigants. (II) The petitioner would plant 25 saplings/plants of the shaded trees in public vicinity area within a period of 15 days from today with an undertaking that he shall take care of the plants, till conclusion of the trial and submit the photographs of the plants quarterly/every three months before the Trial Court till conclusion of the Trial. 7. The reasons for passing the present order asking the petitioner to plant 25 saplings/plants is in the interest of public at large and for the greater public good. Planting trees is considered as an appropriate initiative as it will provide numerous benefits to the city and the surrounding community for decades and centuries. Future generations will get benefit from cleaner, fresh oxygen-rich environment. 8. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Trial Court on or before 15.12.2025. (4 of 4) [CRLMP-2727/2025] 9. If the aforesaid conditions, as directed by this Court, are complied by the petitioner within the above stipulated time, the Trial Court shall recall the arrest warrants issued against the petitioner and release the petitioner on bail after taking personal and surety bonds subject to its satisfaction. 10. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/24