[2026:RJ-JP:1635] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5591/2025 Vikas Mahajan S/o Late Shri Hukum Chand, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Flat No. 18,01/03, Harikripa, Apartment, Sector-10, Vidhyadhar Nagar. ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gaurav Jain Mr. Arpit Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP Mr. Anoop Kumar, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 15/01/2026 1. This anticipatory bail application is filed by the accused peti- tioner u/S 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 241/2023 regis- tered at Police Station Vidhyadhar Nagar, District Jaipur (North) for offences punishable u/S 406, 420, 388, 389, 506 & 120-B IPC. 2. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioner as well as learned Public Prose- cutor and the counsel for the complainant. 3. The allegation against the accused petitioner is that by way of preparing forged documents he has given undue benefits from the business which was in the partnership of the accused peti- tioner and the complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submitted that the accused petitioner has been implicated in a case based on [2026:RJ-JP:1635] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5591/2025] false and fabricated facts. He further submitted that because of some dispute between the accused and complainant who were the partners in business, the present case has been lodged by the complainant to create pressure for delivering some money to him. It is also submitted that the accused petitioner is always ready to cooperate in the investigation. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the com- plainant vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. The Court, vide order dated 19.06.2025 had directed the ac- cused petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer who is to interrogate him. 7. As per the submissions of learned counsel for the accused petitioner, the accused petitioner has appeared before the Investi- gating Officer and he has been interrogated and this fact has also been verified by the learned Public Prosecutor. 8. Taking into consideration the allegations against the accused petitioner and more particularly the fact that he has already been interrogated by the Investigating Officer, this Court without ex- pressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Vidhyadhar Nagar, District Jaipur (North) in FIR No. 241/2023 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail, pro- vided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of [2026:RJ-JP:1635] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5591/2025] Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indi- rectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the court. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /258