BALJEET YADAV SON OF GOPI RAM YADAV v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
CRLMA/289/2026 · 2026-07-17
Ravi Chirania
Public Interest Litigationbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10343 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10343 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:27311] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 289/2026 URN: CRLMA / 733U / 2026 In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6697/2026 Baljeet Yadav Son Of Gopi Ram Yadav, Resident Of 26, Gyan Vihar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus Directorate Of Enforcement, Through Special Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Order 17/07/2026
1. The matter comes up on an application seeking correction in the order dated 30.06.2026, inter alia stating that in para No.3, the reference of Criminal Misc. Petition Nos. “1898/2024 & 1778/2024” has been wrongly mentioned instead of “1989/2024 and 8778/2024” due to an inadvertent error.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
3. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, this court finds that the correction sought by counsel for applicant is clerical and typographical mistake and there is no bar under Section 403 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for correcting such error.
[2026:RJ-JP:27311] (2 of 2) [CRLMA-289/2026]
4. Hence, in view of above, in para No.3 of the order dated 30.06.2026, the reference of Criminal Misc. Petition Nos.
“1898/2024 & 1778/2024” be read as “1989/2024 and 8778/2024”.
5. This order shall be treated as part of the order dated
30.06.2026.
6. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
(RAVI CHIRANIA),J 36/RAHUL