[2026:RJ-JP:2356] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 916/2026 Dilip Kumar Sawlani S/o Late Tirthdas, Aged About 60 Years, R/o 4-B-23 Sector-4, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg with Mr. Nonit Hatila For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, Public Prosecutor Mr. Sudhir Jain for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 20/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.369/2024 registered at Police Station Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur City (East) for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 392, 420, 421 and 120-B IPC. 2. Heard. 3. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor assisted by counsel for the complainant and also gone through the material made available on record including copy of plaint of a suit filed by the complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation made against the accused-petitioner false and fabricated. He also [2026:RJ-JP:2356] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-916/2026] submits that there is a house under the title of wife of the accused-petitioner and that house has not been sold to the complainant. He also submits that the complainant has prepared a forged sale agreement of the petitioner's house. When the complainant got published a public notice in the newspaper on 04.09.2024 claiming therein, that the complainant has purchased the said house. The wife of the accused-petitioner seen the notice and thereafter, on 11.09.2024 published a notice in the newspaper controverted the facts stated in the public notice got published by the complainant. It is the complainant who has tried to get possession over the petitioner's house whereas, wife of the petitioner lodged an FIR against the complainant party on 05.11.2024. 5. Learned counsel further submits that though the Police after completion of investigation has already filed a negative final report observing that the matter is of civil nature and thereafter, the complainant has moved an application before the competent court to order for further investigation. 6. It is also submitted by counsel for the petitioner that as regards the alleged sale of house to the complainant, the complainant has already filed a civil suit for specific performance of the alleged sale agreement on 06.11.2024 wherein, he has got interim relief from the concerned court on 11.11.2024 to that extent that the accused-petitioner/owner of the house shall not transfer or alienate the house to a third party. It is also submitted that after having obtained interim relief from the civil court, the [2026:RJ-JP:2356] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-916/2026] complainant so as to create pressure upon the accused-petitioner has lodged this criminal case. 7. It is also submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2025 and he is no more required for any kind of interrogation or recovery. 8. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that there are other criminal antecedents to the discredit of the accused- petitioner. He also submits that initially the accused-petitioner has handed over possession of the house at the time of the alleged sale agreement but now he has oust the complainant from the house. 10. Having gone through the material placed before this Court, it is found that one other case is pending against the accused- petitioner. 11. Pendency of one other criminal case, it cannot be said that the accused-petitioner is a habitual offender. 12. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of this case as borne out from the material placed before this Court on record as well as having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the parties and the fact that the dispute in between the parties is sub-judice before the civil court and the accused- petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2025 so also the co-accused, namely, Smt. Hema Sawlani has already been enlarged on bail, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits or [2026:RJ-JP:2356] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-916/2026] demerits of the case deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 13. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above shall be enlarged on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /6