[2026:RJ-JP:17057] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1516/2026 Mohammed Hamid S/o Shri Abdul Hameed, R/o Ashok Chowk, Aadarsh Nagar, Janta Colony, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asad Ali For Respondent(s) : Ms. Aarti Sharma, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 22/04/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. arising out of F.I.R. No.716/2022 registered with the Police Station, Bhiwadi, District Bhiwadi for offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 & 506 of IPC. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Counsel also submits that this Court vide order dated 07.04.2026, directed the accused-petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation. It is also submitted that in compliance of the aforementioned order, the accused-petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating Officer and has been interrogated by him. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner after being interrogated, is no more required for any kind of interrogation or recovery and he is ready to cooperate with [2026:RJ-JP:17057] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1516/2026] the investigation in future. He further submits that co-accused, Taiyab, who is also said to be the witness of the sale deed, has already been extended the benefit of anticipatory bail vide order dated 05.09.2024. The learned counsel further submits that no purpose will be served in sending the accused-petitioner in custody. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the anticipatory bail application, however, she verifies the fact that the accused- petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has been interrogated. 4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Having regard to the allegations levelled against the accused-petitioner, so also the fact that under the directions of this Court, the accused-petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has been interrogated and more particularly the fact that co-accused, Taiyab, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, 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 Bhiwadi, District Bhiwadi in F.I.R. No. 716/2022 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:- [2026:RJ-JP:17057] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1516/2026] (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. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /91