[2026:RJ-JP:28879] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8906/2026 CNR: RJHC020547502026 | URN: CRLMB / 16340U / 2026 Pramila W/o Sumit Kumar Choudhary, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ff-02, Kadiyan Complex, Village Isarwal, Dist. Bhiwani (Haryana). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Yadav, P.P. Mr. Abdul Saleem ASI, Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 27/07/2026 1. The present criminal miscellaneous bail application has been preferred by the accused-petitioner under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No. 223/2026, registered at Police Station-Aklera, District-Jhalawar, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 61(2) of the BNS, 2023. 2. This Court, vide order dated 19.06.2026, permitted the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 30.06.2026 and granted him interim protection. 3. On 10.07.2026, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner could not join the investigation and sought further time for the said purpose. Accordingly, this Court granted time till 15.07.2026. further, on 17.07.2026, no one [2026:RJ-JP:28879] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8906/2026] appeared on behalf of the petitioner to inform the Court whether the petitioner had joined the investigation. 4. Accordingly, this Court deemed it appropriate to call for a status report from the Investigating Officer, and the matter was posted for 22.07.2026. On 22.07.2026, again no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, the Investigating Officer was directed to inform the Court whether the petitioner had appeared before him and joined the investigation. The matter was accordingly adjourned to 27.07.2026. 5. Today again, no one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The Investigating Officer, who is present in person, submits that the petitioner has not joined the investigation and has not appeared before him at any point of time for interrogation. 6. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no justification to continue the interim protection granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed and the interim protection granted earlier stands vacated. (BIPIN GUPTA),J 127/KRATIKA