[2025:RJ-JP:23656] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2966/2025 Niranjan S/o Shri Bhoop Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Rundh Ikran, Police Station Chikasana, Tehsil And District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nikhlesh Katara, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shri Ram Dhakar, Public Prosecutor. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL (V. J.) Order 27/06/2025 1. Instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by accused-petitioner under the apprehension of his arrest in connection with FIR No.0389/2019 registered at Police Station Mathuragate, District Bharatpur for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. Heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as learned public prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. It is trite law that anticipatory bail can be granted in exceptional circumstances where the court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely been involved in the crime and would not misuse his/ her liberty. Such proposition of law has [2025:RJ-JP:23656] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2966/2025] been expounded by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Jai Prakash Singh Vs. State of Bihar [(2012) 4 SCC 379] & State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma [AIR 2014 SC 626]. 4. Taking into consideration the allegation leveled against the accused-petitioner that he has prepared a forged birth certificate by misusing seal and signature of the Medical Jurist of RBM Hospital, Bharatpur; as per the impugned order, accused- petitioner has criminal antecedents as FIR No.17/2019 for offences punishable under Sections 363-A and 366-A of Indian Penal Code was registered against him which is currently under investigation and relying upon the above said judgments passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court finds it difficult to discern, at this stage, whether the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this matter or any exceptional circumstances are there, and therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner. 5. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands dismissed. (SUDESH BANSAL (V. J.)),J Tushar/49