[2026:RJ-JP:3811] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. IInd Bail Application No. 9596/2025 1. Majeed S/o Najaf Khan, R/o Village Kathoal, Police Station Pahari, Distt. Bharatpur. 2. Samsu S/o Ishab, R/o Village Kathoal, Police Station Pa- hari, Distt. Bharatpur. ----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Adv. Arafat Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 28/01/2026 1. This second anticipatory bail application has been filed by the accused petitioners under Section 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 12/2015 registered with the Police Station Pahari, District Bharatpur for offences u/S 143, 332, 353, 307, 224, 225, 188 & 109 IPC and Section 3 of the PDPP Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused petitioners submits that the accused petitioners have falsely been implicated in the matter. Counsel further submits that the dispute between the parties has already been settled, hence, there is no need of custodial interro- gation of the accused petitioners, therefore the accused petition- ers may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the accused petitioners placed reliance [2026:RJ-JP:3811] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9596/2025] upon the judgment of the Full Bench passed in the case of Ganesh Raj Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. RLR 2005(2) 128 (F.B. Cr. Misc. Second Bail Application No.783/2005) decided on 01.04.2005. Counsel also placed reliance upon the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in case of Praveen Ku- mar Jadon Vs. State of Raj. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail No.2818/2018) decided on 10.04.2018 & Aditya @ Bhupendra @ Guddu Vs. State of Raj. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.16444/2024) decided on 03.01.2025. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submis- sions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. Considered the submissions made at bar. 6. The Hon’ble Apex Court, in case of Gurvinder Singh Vs. Jasbir Singh @ Jasvir Singh & Anr. In Criminal Appeal No. ------of 2025 (@ Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.3843/2025, decided on 15.09.2025, had observed as under:- “6. Having Considered the matter in depth, we find substance in the contention of learned counsel for the appellant. 7. The learned Single Judge, after having passed an order dismissing the prayer for antici- patory bail, could not have revived the proceed- ings, much less by way of restoration. The Court could not have then proceeded to reverse its earlier order by allowing the prayer for anticipa- tory bail which was initially rejected. 8. Accordingly, the order impugned dated 07.02.2025 stands set aside. The initial order dated 17.01.2025, dismissing the application and prayer for anticipatory bail, stands revived. 9. Consequences to follow. The parties are left open to avail the remedies as may be avail- able to them in law.” [2026:RJ-JP:3811] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9596/2025] 7. In view of the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gurvinder Singh(supra), this Court is not inclined to entertain this second anticipatory bail application. 8. Accordingly, this second anticipatory bail application is dis- missed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /196