State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp v. Connected

: Mr. Gajveer Singh Rajawat Mr. Jai Kishan Yogi Mr. Yenu Satyan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN 29/08/2025 Order

1. Instant applications for bail are filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the applicants-accused Hemraj S/o Dhannalal and Latur Lal S/o Dhanna Lal in FIR No. 669/2024 dated

11.12.2024 registered at P.S. Udhyog Nagar (Kota City) [2025:RJ-JP:34806] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-10451/2025] whereby the applicants-accused were charged under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2)(a) of BNS.

2. The applicants were arrested and are in judicial custody since their arrest. The Court below has dismissed the bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants relying upon grounds raised in bail applications submits that the applicant are innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he submits that the investigation relating to present applicants-accused is complete and are no more required by the Investigating Agency for investigation. He further assures that in case, the applicants-accused are required the applicants-accused will be available. He also submits that the trial will take its own time and no purpose will be served by keeping the applicants-accused in custody.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner Hemraj submitted that he is not named in the FIR and there is no allegation against him in the FIR. He further submitted that only because of suspicion, petitioner Hemraj was named and he was arrayed as an accused by police in connivance with complainant. He further referred a civil suit filed by Ramlal and others against Hari Narayan and Laturlal and submitted that even petitioner Hemraj is not made a party to the civil suit and same is sufficient to show that this petitioner is not involved in any criminal act allegedly committed by Laturlal or Hari Narayan. He also submitted that temporary injunction is granted in favour of complainant in TI Application No.519/2024. He [2025:RJ-JP:34806] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-10451/2025] further submitted that there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner Laturlal submitted that the age of present petitioner is 73 years and he is illiterate person. He further submitted that the entire act is committed by Hari Narayan Soni and he has taken advantage of age of present petitioner to execute document. He further submitted that there is a civil dispute filed before the civil court before institution of criminal complaint. He also submitted that after filing of civil suit, an injunction order is granted in favour of plaintiff and afterwards current FIR is registered by complainant. He further submitted that it is a case of civil dispute and given color of criminal case.

6. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant. Learned counsel for complainant submitted that father of complainant was blind since 2003 and on stamp purchase in 2015, a false power of attorney is prepared after death of Karan @ Ramkaran. He further submitted that power of attorney was executed on 10.09.2007 after death of Ramkaran show that it is fabricated document executed on stamp issued and sold in year 2015. He further submitted that this is a grave act committed by the petitioners.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record.

8. On the basis of a criminal complaint filed by Ramlal, Giriraj, Motilal and Karan against Hari Narayan, Laturlal, Ucchav Lal, Mahaveer, Bhagwan Singh, Jeetu and Others about transfer [2025:RJ-JP:34806] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-10451/2025] of property on the basis of forged power of attorney executed on 10.09.2007 the matter is registered and investigated. After ascertaining role and involvement of Hemraj and Latur, both were arrested. We have considered the investigation conducted so far and found that Latur was lured by Hemraj and others and Hemraj is actively involved in execution of fabricated document and the matter is at investigation stage.

9. The petitioner Latur Lal is more than 72 years of age and considering this age, I am of considered view that it is appropriate to grant him bail but this bail is because of his age and not on basis of role and involvement in the matter. The matter is of grave nature wherein Hemraj has played role with other accused, therefore he is not entitled to be released on bail.

10. Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant- accused Latur Lal S/o Dhanna Lal, is hereby allowed and the applicant-accused is ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner. (ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law. [2025:RJ-JP:34806] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-10451/2025] (iii) The applicant-accused shall attend the hearing of the Trial Court on the date fixed by the Trial court or as and when asked to appear before the Trial Court. (iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the applicant-accused shall be liable to be canceled.

11. The bail application preferred by petitioner Hemraj S/o Dhannalal is hereby dismissed.

12. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail. PREETI VALECHA /127-128 (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J