Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19853 (RAJ)

SAMAYSINGH S/O RAMESH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/15206/2025 · 2026-01-13

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:1376] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15206/2025 Samaysingh S/o Ramesh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Khandeep, Police Station Bajirpur, District Sawai Madhopur. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Timan Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 13/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No.0260/2025 registered with the Police Station, Balghat, District Karauli for offence under Section 13 of Rajasthan RPGO Act and Section 112(2) of B.N.S., 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the statement of co-accused. He further submits that the Court vide order dated 04.12.2025, directed the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer to join the investigation. He also submits that in view of the direction of the Court, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has been interrogated and he is no more required for any kind of further interrogation or recovery. Therefore, the accused-petitioner may [2026:RJ-JP:1376] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15206/2025] be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the anticipatory bail application. He submits that the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has been interrogated. 4. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and so also the injury report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner and more particularly the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation in view of the direction of the Court, this Court deems just and proper to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Balghat, District Karauli in F.I.R. No. 0260/2025 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 [2026:RJ-JP:1376] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15206/2025] the Court or any police officer, and (iii). that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /226