[2026:RJ-JP:17761] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 25/2026 Sukhdev Sharma S/o Shri Babulal Sharma, R/o Village Mojmabaad, Tehsil Mojmabaad, Police Station Phagi, District Jaipur, Raj., Currently Residing At Village Beelwa, Tehsil Sanganer, Police Station Shivdaspura, Jaipur (Rajasthan) Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Fateh Ram Meena, Adv. Mr. Akash Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Vivek Chaudhary, PP Ms. Aradhana Swami, Adv. Mr. Khurshid Ahmed, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 27/04/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.379/2015, registered at Police Station Kanota, District Jaipur Rural for the offence(s) under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that the present case was instituted through a complaint and the petitioner was not aware that the police has obtained a warrant under Section 37 of the Police Act, threafter the petitioner was arrested on 27.11.2025. It is further contended [2026:RJ-JP:17761] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-25/2026] that instead of filing a cancellation case for registration, an FIR was filed against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner by deceiving the complainant, sold the property through a registered sale deed knowing the fact that the property was already sold to another person. It is argued that even if it is presumed that the petitioner has committed any offence, then also the matter is triable by the Magistrate and the petitioner's custody is around five months, the charge-sheet has already been submitted, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner, therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, 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 bail application and contended that the petitioner remained absconding for almost 11 years and after adopting due process, a warrant under Section 37 of the Police Act was obtained against the petitioner and thereafter, the concerned trial Court, after recording its satisfaction, issued the standing warrant against the petitioner. The standing warrant also remained unserved for a quite a long period and the procedure to compel the presence of the petitioner by issuance of notice under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. was also initiated. Therefore, considering the long absence of the petitioner and the allegations in the present complaint, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the period of custody of the petitioner, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. [2026:RJ-JP:17761] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-25/2026] 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Sukhdev Sharma S/o Shri Babulal Sharma, in connection with FIR No.379/2015, registered at Police Station Kanota, District Jaipur Rural, 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 called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-10