[2025:RJ-JP:9257] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1834/2025 Ravi Saxena S/o Amar Saxena, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Plot No. 214, Kesar Nagar, Muhana Mandi Road, Thana Muhana Jaipur. (Presently Accused Petitioner Is Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Babu Lal Bairwa HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/03/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.46/2023 registered at Police Station Bajaj Nagar, District Jaipur City (East) (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 352, 354, 506 & 120B of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that perusal of the FIR shows that essentially, there is civil dispute between the parties. It is submitted that sale deed has already been executed in favour of the complainant on 21.03.2024 with regard to plot No.96 situated at B.M. City, Jhujharpura, Chaksu, Tonk Road Jaipur, District Jaipur and possession has already been handed over to the complainant. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel further submits that it is true that 41 other cases have been registered against the petitioner but in most of the [2025:RJ-JP:9257] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1834/2025] cases he has been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the complainant submits that though it has been mentioned in the sale deed that possession has been handed over to the complainant but till date, complainant is not in possession of the said plot. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though possession has already been handed over to the complainant but in case complainant is aggrieved with regard to the possession of the said plot, he assures that possession shall be handed over to the complainant and appropriate receipt in this regard will be taken from him. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, so also the nature of dispute between the parties; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Ravi Saxena S/o Amar Saxena shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of [2025:RJ-JP:9257] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1834/2025] Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. It is made clear that the accused petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in the first week of every month in the concerned police station. 9. The SHO concerned is directed to maintain a register recording attendance of the accused, as mentioned above. In case, the petitioner fails to mark his attendance as mentioned above, the SHO shall intimate the trial court immediately. 10. If breach of any of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. 11. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is still in judicial custody in some of the cases and he will obtain the receipt with regard to the possession of the said plot from the complainant when he will be released from the custody. 12. If, after being released from the judicial custody, petitioner fails to obtain receipt from the complainant with regard to the possession of the said plot, the complainant would be at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /306