[2026:RJ-JP:14318] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 442/2019 Mahant Mahesh Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramnarayan Sharma, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Mandir Shri Kala Hanumanji, Opposite Jalmahal, Amer Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. Ram Gopal Saraf S/o Brij Mohan Saraf, R/o Brij Vatika D- 70, Residency Road, Bear Rajmahal Palace Hotel, C- Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Lal Meena For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sonal Singh for Mr. Alok Garg JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/04/2026 1. By way of filing the instant petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 07.09.2017 passed by the Court of the Special Metropolitan Maistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur by which bail bonds of the petitioner have been forfeited and the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C. has been initiated. A challenge has also been led to the subsequent order dated 04.10.2017 passed by the said Court, by which the petitioner has been declared as absconder and orders have been passed for initiating the proceedings under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. 2. Learned counsel submits that the proceedings under Section 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. cannot be initiated against the petitioner before [2026:RJ-JP:14318] (2 of 4) [CRLW-442/2019] the expiry of 30 days, in terms of the above provisions, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant/respondent oppose the arguments and submits that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is lying pending against the petitioner since 2016. The petitioner willfully and deliberately did not appear before the Trial Court, with an object to delay the disposal of the complaint, that is why the order impugned have been passed. Counsel further submits that there is no illegality in the orders passed by the Court below, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted and the instant petition is liable to be rejected. 4. Counsel submits that the petitioner is now ready and willing to appear before the trial court, so appropriate orders be passed. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Perusal of the record indicates that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed by the complainant against the petitioner in the year 2016, it appears that on two occasions the petitioner did not appear, hence, his bail bonds were forfeited and this is for the third time, the petitioner has failed to appear before the Court on account of which the above impugned orders and proceedings were initiated against him. The sole object of the petitioner was to delay the disposal of the complaint pending against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. [2026:RJ-JP:14318] (3 of 4) [CRLW-442/2019] 7. This Court is not going into the correctness of the orders passed by the Court below and looking to the fact that, now the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the Trial Court. 8. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition stands disposed of with the following terms:- (i) The petitioner would deposit a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur within a period of 15 days from today. The President/Secretary of the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur are directed to utilize the aforesaid amount under the “Junior Advocates Welfare Fund for purchasing Law Books” and disburse the same to the young advocates having a practice of more than one year and less than five years, for purchasing Law Books. The aforesaid amount would be kept by the Bar Association in a separate account in terms of the order dated 11.02.2026 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 3327/2018. It is made clear that the aforesaid amount would not be utilized by the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur for no other purpose except the above. (ii) The petitioner would plant 25 shade bearing trees in his vicinity in public area. The aforesaid process would be carried over by him within the above stipulated time. (iii) The petitioner would submit the photographs of these shade bearing trees along-with an undertaking before the Trial Court to show that the Condition No.II imposed by this Court has been duly complied with by him and he would take care of these plants till they grow and get in proper shape and he would submit the actual photographs of trees at the end of every six months in every year till conclusion of the trial. [2026:RJ-JP:14318] (4 of 4) [CRLW-442/2019] 9. In case, the petitioner complies with the aforesaid order or in case, he appears before the Trial Court on or before 30.04.2026, he would be released on bail after taking his personal and surety bonds, subject to its satisfaction. 10. The reasons for passing this present order directing the petitioner to plant 25 shade bearing trees 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. 11. In case the petitioner fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions the Trial Court would be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 11. Let the copy of this order be sent to the President/Secretary of the Bar Association of Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur for necessary action and compliance. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Shivam-Puneet/29