Purushottam Bairwa @ Rajraman Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2025)

Purushottam Bairwa @ Rajraman Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: the interim protection order dated 12.03.2025 was made absolute; in the event of arrest, the accused-applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, subject to the conditions of availability for interrogation, refraining from inducement/threat/promise to persons acquainted with the facts, and not leaving India without previous permission of the court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant (Purushottam Bairwa @ Rajraman) is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 494/2024, Police Station Jaisinghpura Khor, District Jaipur City (North), for the offences under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 115(2) & 126(2) of BNS, 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

In deciding the application, the court took into account that the matter is triable by the Magistrate and that the accused-applicant had already joined investigation as directed vide the interim order dated 12.03.2025, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the material on record.

Ratio / Principle

The interim protection order dated 12.03.2025 was made absolute and the anticipatory bail application was allowed, expressly without commenting on the merits/demerits of the case.

Key takeaways

In the event of arrest of the accused-applicant, the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of Police Station Jaisinghpura Khor, District Jaipur City (North), in FIR No. 494/2024 shall release him on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.ratio¶19
Condition of bail: the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.ratio¶20
Condition of bail: the applicant 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.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allowed — anticipatory bail. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 814/2025 ([CRLMB-814/2025]), High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sameer Jain), order dated 06/11/2025. Filed under Section 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 494/2024, Police Station Jaisinghpura Khor, District Jaipur City (North), for offences under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 115(2) & 126(2) of BNS, 2023. Considering that the matter is triable by the Magistrate and that the accused-applicant (Purushottam Bairwa @ Rajraman) had already joined investigation as directed vide the interim order dated 12.03.2025, and expressly without commenting on the merits/demerits of the case, the court made that interim order absolute and allowed the application. On any arrest, release upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, subject to: (i) availability for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure; and (iii) no leaving India without previous permission of the court.

[2025:RJ-JP:44435]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 814/2025

Purushottam Bairwa @ Rajraman, R/o Shyam Vatika Jaisinghpura Khor, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amitabh Vijaywargia For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

06/11/2025

The present bail application has been filed under Section 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 494/2024 registered at Police Station Jaisinghpura Khor District Jaipur City (North) for the offence(s) under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 115(2) & 126(2) of BNS, 2023.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the case has primarily been registered under Section 318 of the BNSS, which is triable by the Magistrate. It is further submitted that the dispute arises out of monetary transactions relating to share trading. Learned counsel has further submitted that vide order dated 12.03.2025, interim protection from arrest was granted to the applicant subject to the condition that applicant joins investigation. In compliance of the same, the applicant joined investigation as directed.

[2025:RJ-JP:44435]

[CRLMB-814/2025]

(2 of 2)

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

Considering the contentions put-forth by the counsel for the parties, considering that matter is triable by Magistrate and considering the fact that the accused-applicant has already joined investigation as directed vide interim order dated 12.03.2025 and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court deems it appropriate to make the order dated 12.03.2025 absolute and allow the anticipatory bail application. 5. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Jaisinghpura Khor District Jaipur City (North) in F.I.R. No. 494/2024 is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused-applicant Purushottam Bairwa @ Rajraman shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant 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 applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

(SAMEER JAIN),J

JKP/259