[2026:RJ-JP:16691] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5749/2026 Shyam Lal Meena S/o Shri Gulab Meena, R/o Village - Chhatarpura, Post Dantli, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Chaudhary, PP Mr. Deepak Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 20/04/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 70/2023, registered at Police Station Ramnagariya, District Jaipur City (East) for the offence(s) under Sections 341, 323, 384, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 500, 504 and 120-B of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that initially the report was lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 504, 323 and 143 of IPC, however, the Police did not submit the charge-sheet under Section 467, 468 and 471 of IPC qua the petitioner. It is also contended that the accused-petitioner has not forged any documents and the land belong to the [2026:RJ-JP:16691] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-5749/2026] petitioner and the petitioner has not cheated anyone and the proceedings under Section 90-B which were initiated was later on cancelled. It is further contended that no right was given to the society to allot the pattas to the holders and the society S.S. Developers on his own granted several pattas. It is argued that another FIR Bearing No.74/2023 was also registered in the Police Station Ramnagariya, District Jaipur City East and after investigation the Police has submitted the final negative report with the conclusion that the Developers has no right to allot any pattas as the right vest with the land holders. It is also argued that in the present case the investigation was done by four Investigating Officer and the complainant in collusion with the Police Officials has wrongly submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioner and the other co-accused. It is further argued that the civil litigation between the petitioner and the S.S. Developers is pending since 2023, the accused-petitioner is in custody since long and further trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, considering the aforesaid fact, 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. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the complainant that the disputed land was sold by one Gulab and his wife to the Developer Society and huge amount was given to Gulab and to the present petitioner. The petitioner and the other co-accused after receiving the amount has executed 'Pratiga Patra' and thereafter Mr. Prem Surana formed a society in the name of Shri [2026:RJ-JP:16691] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-5749/2026] Narsingh Arcade (Shankar Vihar) and allotment letters were issued to the family members of the petitioner and to the petitioner himself. The act of the petitioner itself constitute offence under Sections 467, 468, 471 of IPC. It is further contended that the seven FIRs were also registered against the petitioner and the other co-accused, therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused material available on record. 6. It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case. The Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioner under Sections 420, 406, 384 and 120-B of IPC and did not submit the charge-sheet for offence relating to forgery of any documents. The accused-petitioner is in custody since long, the matter is exclusively triable by Magistrate and civil litigation is pending between the petitioner and the society (S.S. Developers) and further trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, this Court deems it proper to allow the instant bail application of the accused- petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Shyam Lal Meena S/o Shri Gulab Meena, in connection with FIR No.70/2023, registered at Police Station Ramnagariya, District Jaipur City (East) shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when [2026:RJ-JP:16691] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-5749/2026] called upon to do so. The learned trial Judge shall also verify the address and the contact details of the surety through concerned S.H.O. before releasing the accused-petitioner on bail. 8. The accused-petitioner is also directed to mark his presence on 25th of every month before the concerned Police Station till conclusion of the trial. The SHO of the concerned Police Station is directed to maintain a regular register marking the presence of the accused-petitioner and shall send the presence report of the accused-petitioner on the same day to the concerned trial Court every month without any delay. In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. 9. The accused-petitioner is directed to submit his present address along with his mobile number to the concerned S.H.O. within 7 days from his release and the concerned S.H.O. shall verify the said address and the mobile number. In case if the petitioner changes his address or mobile number he shall submit the same before the concerned S.H.O. and also before the concerned learned trial Court. 10. A copy of this order shall be sent to the concerned S.H.O. for its strict compliance. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J ashu /40