[2026:RJ-JP:395] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.15350/2025 Vinod Singh Nirwan S/o Shri Lilu Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Near Rakesh School, Ward No. 30 Water Works, Pilani, Thana Pilani, Jhunjhunu. (Presently Confining In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sumit Shiag, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP Mr. Sanjay Joshi, Adv. Mr. Banvari Lal Saini, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 07/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.378/2024, registered at Police Station Sadar Jaipur, District Jaipur (West) for the offence(s) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged rent deed was not prepared by the petitioner. The rent deed was given by the complainant and the same was submitted before the Court by the petitioner. The petitioner has not forged any document and was in a relationship of tenant with the complainant. A civil suit is already pending between them. It is further contended that, in order to evict the petitioner from the [2026:RJ-JP:395] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15350/2025] rented property, a false FIR has been lodged against the petitioner. The accused-petitioner is in custody since 05.11.2025, the matter is exclusively triable by Magistrate and the trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have vehemently opposed the grant of bail application. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report, the same is taken on record. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner submitted a forged document creating a false tenancy over the disputed land. After investigation, the police found that no such stamp vendor ever existed and this information was furnished to the Investigating Officer by the DIG, Stamp. It is further contended that the said document was produced before the Court on 27.05.2024 and during investigation it was found that the petitioner has destroyed the original document and the same could not be recovered. Thus, the petitioner has committed fraud not only with the complainant but also with the Court. Therefore, the instant bail application may be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused the material available on record. 6. It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case. Considering the fact that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and the certified copies submitted along with the case diary clearly shows that the petitioner submitted a document creating a fresh tenancy in his favour, which after investigation found to be forged. The Police also investigated that [2026:RJ-JP:395] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15350/2025] no such stamp vendor exist and the purchase of the stamps was found untrue. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the accused-petitioner is hereby dismissed with the liberty to file afresh after filing of the chargesheet. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-129