HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.6785/2025 Rameshwar Kumawat S/o Sh. Nand Kishore Kumawat, Aged About 69 Years, 5/27, Keshri Chand Choudhary Nagar, Ajmer Road, Japur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vivek Goyal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 30/10/2025 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 23.09.2025 passed by District & Sessions Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan-I by which the revision petition submitted by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 18.08.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, has been rejected on the ground of non-maintainability of the revision petition against interlocutory order. 2. By passing the order dated 18.08.2025, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has rejected the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. for converting the arrest warrants issued in his name into bailable warrants. (2 of 4) [CRLMP-6785/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was facing trial before the trial court since 2013 and during the pendency of the case, a compromise took place between the parties and the same was handed over to the counsel appearing before the trial court and counsel assured the petitioner that he would intimate the outcome of the same to the petitioner and under that assurance, the petitioner did not appear before the trial court. Learned counsel submits that on account of absence of the petitioner, his bail bonds were forfeited and arrest warrants have been issued in the name of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to face the trial, therefore, the arrest warrants issued against the petitioner be converted into bailable warrants. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner remained absconding for more than a decade and the trial has been hampered for want of appearance of the petitioner since 2015, hence, under these circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve any indulgence of this Court. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 6. This Court does not find the explanation given by the petitioner to be satisfactory that, after the compromise took place between the parties, the deed of compromise was handed over to the counsel appearing before the trial court. The petitioner never bothered to enquire about the status of the case pending against him before the trial court since 2013 and his bail bonds were finally forfeited on 05.11.2015. (3 of 4) [CRLMP-6785/2025] 7. It appears that because of the aforesaid, the trial has been hampered for a period of around 10 years, but looking to the fact that the petitioner is facing trial for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC ,and he is ready and willing to appear before the trial court as and when directed, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant criminal misc. petition with the following conditions:- (I) The petitioner would pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- at the trial court in the Litigation Welfare Fund and the same would be utilised by the trial court in the interest and welfare of poor and needy litigants, as and when required. (II) The petitioner would plant 21 shady plants in their vicinity in public area. The aforesaid process would be carried over by him within a period of two weeks from today and he is further directed to look after these plants. (III) The petitioner would submit the photographs of these plants before the trial court to show that the condition No.II imposed by this Court has been duly complied by him. 8. The reasons for passing this present order directing the petitioner to plant 21 plants is in the interest of the public at large and for the greater public good. Planting trees as directed above, is one such initiative, which this Court considers to be appropriate, as trees, for as long as they thrive whether for decades or centuries will continuously and silently offer numerous benefits to the city and the surrounding community. Future generations will benefit from a cleaner, fresh and oxygen-rich environment. 9. In case, the petitioner complies with the aforesaid conditions, and the petitioner surrenders before the trial court on (4 of 4) [CRLMP-6785/2025] or before 17.11.2025, he shall be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial court. 10. In case, the petitioner fails to comply with any of the aforesaid conditions within the above stipulated time, the order dated 18.08.2025 would come into effect automatically. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the criminal misc. petition, stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/59