[2026:RJ-JP:869] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9472/2025 Lal Bahadur S/o Dharmender Yadav, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Gram Post Bhindusi Menjara Maheniya, Tehsil And District Alwar (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jai Raj Tantia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 09/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No.673/2023 registered with the Police Station, Kotwali Alwar, District Alwar for offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the contents of the First Information Report, the allegation against the accused-petitioner is of obtaining patta on a land from the UIT, Alwar, which is said to be the land of the complainant. Learned counsel further submits that the patta was issued by the UIT, Alwar on 25.07.2013. He further submits that Being aggrieved by the patta issued by the UIT, Alwar, for the plot No.7 out of the land of Khasra No.129 which is situated at District Alwar, the complainant has already preferred a civil suit on 05.07.2023 and [2026:RJ-JP:869] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-9472/2025] along with the plaint, the complainant also filed an application for temporary injunction. He also submits that the application filed by the complainant for temporary injunction was dismissed vide order dated 27.07.2023 with the observations that the plaintiff (complainant) is not having prima facie case in his favour. Learned counsel further submits that being aggrieved by the order of dismissal of temporary injunction application, the complainant has also preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Authority, which is still pending for adjudication. He also submits that since the matter is sub judice before the learned Civil Court, it would not be in the fitness of things to send the petitioner into custody and he is always ready to co-operate with the investigation. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submits that the accused-petitioner is not co- operating in investigation even after direction of the Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.5337/2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is always ready to co-operate with the investigation and as and when the Investigating Officer will ask him by issuing notice, he will appear before him. 5. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and so also perused the material made available on record along with the bail application. [2026:RJ-JP:869] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-9472/2025] 6. Taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that a litigation is pending before the learned Civil Court as regards the dispute in between the parties, this Court deems just and proper to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Kotwali Alwar, District Alwar in F.I.R. No. 673/2023 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner he shall be released on bail, provided 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 Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each 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 indirectly 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 previous permission of the Court. 8. However, it is made clear that in case the Investigating Officer issues a notice to the accused-petitioner for interrogation or submitting the documents and if the accused-petitioner does not co-operate even after receiving the notice, the prosecution [2026:RJ-JP:869] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-9472/2025] would be free to make an application for cancellation of this order before this Court. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /248