HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2595/2026 Kamal Kumar Adlakha S/o Shri Arjun Lal, aged about 47 Years, R/o Plot No. B-295, Santoshi Nagar, Dadabadi, Kota At Present At Krishna Dairy Ke Pass, Badgavn, Police Nanta, Kota District Kota (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2596/2026 Mohammed Shakeel Ahmed S/o Munab Khan, Aged About 57 Years, R/o House No. 3-N-51, Vigyan Nagar, Police Station Vigyan Nagar, Kota City At Present Resident Of Tenant At House No. 86, Amrat Nagar First, Borkheda, Police Station Bhorkheda, Kota City. (At Present Lodge At District Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Aditya Jain & Mr.Yatharth Agarwal for Mr.Pawan Kumar Verma Ms.Dipti Jindal with Ms.Reena Goyal for Mr.Amit Jindal For Respondent(s) : Mr.Jitendra Sinh Rathore, PP Mr.Lakshya Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/03/2026 1. The instant bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the petitioners in connection with the impugned FIR (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2595/2026] No.213/2025 registered at the Police Station Borkhera, District Kota, wherein they have been charged for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no role has been assigned to the petitioners in the alleged incident, rather the allegations have been levelled against the principle accused-Durga Shankar stating that he has committed forgery and fabricated certain documents and on the basis of the same, the subject property was sold to the complainant and therefore, the said money has been received by him. Counsel further submits that only the presence of the said petitioners have been shown on the documents executed, where the deal has taken place between the parties for sale of the subject land. Counsel submits that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and the petitioners have been in custody since 27.01.2026 and the investigation/trial will take its own time to conclude, therefore, indulgence of bail may be granted to the petitioners. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application submitted by the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant- respondent submits that the petitioners have actively participated in commission of the alleged offence along-with the co-accused and they are equally responsibly for causing the offence of conspiracy against the petitioners and even the money was also distributed amongst them by the co-accused, therefore, indulgence of bail may not be granted to the petitioners. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2595/2026] 6. Considering the arguments put forward by counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and also looking to the fact that the petitioners have been in custody since 27.01.2026 and the trial will take its own time to conclude hence, without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and appropriate to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioners under Section 483 BNSS. 7. Accordingly, the instant bail applications under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners (i) Kamal Kumar Adlakha S/o Shri Arjun Lal & (ii) Mohammed Shakeel Ahmed S/o Munab Khan arrested in connection with the aforementioned FIR, they may be released on bail; provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing, as and when called upon to do so. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /17-18