Allowed

Arjun Kumar Vishnoi S/O Shri Karnaram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Mar 2025CRLMB/818/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Third bail application in a Rajasthan Public Examinations impersonation case. Trial had not progressed beyond the Investigating Officer's statement despite over a year in custody. Court granted bail on a personal bond with conditions including not leaving District Ajmer.

What did the court decide?

Bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to conditions including no tampering, no similar offence, no leaving District Ajmer without leave.

Arjun Kumar Vishnoi S/O Shri Karnaram Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:9085]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous III Bail Application No. 818/2025 Arjun Kumar Vishnoi S/o Shri Karnaram, R/o Dungarwa, Police Station Bagoda, District Jalore, At Present Resident Of Central Jail, Ajmer.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. M.M. Ranjan, Sr. Adv. assisted by
	Ms. Kanika Burman,
	Mr. Saurabh Bhandari
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Tapesh Agarwal,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

¶10

03/03/2025

¶11

This third bail application has been filed by petitioner under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with FIR No.381/2023 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Ajmer for offence(s) under Sections 419, 420 and 120B IPC and Section 3/10 of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2022.

¶12

Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is languishing in jail in the present matter, since 04.01.2024 and despite of submissions of charge-sheet against the petitioner, there is no progress in the criminal trial, though, statements of Investigating Officer have been recorded on 13.08.2024, but no other prosecution witnesses thereafter has been examined.

¶13

Learned Senior Counsel submits that the main allegation is against one Ashok Kumar, who appeared in place of candidate

[2025:RJ-JP:9085]

[CRLMB-818/2025]

(2 of 3)

Lakharam impersonating himself to be Lakharam in the School Lecturer (School Education) Examination 2022 on 17.10.2022 and the allegation against petitioner is that he facilitate such arrangement for illegal gains. Learned counsel submits that there is no concrete evidence against the petitioner to have any money transaction with other co-accused.

¶18

It has been argued that the petitioner has a legal right for expeditious trial and though, this Court vide order dated 03.02.2025 directed the Investigating Officer to conclude the investigation in the present FIR, yet same has not been concluded due to which the trial against the petitioner has not been concluded and the fundamental right of life and liberty of the petitioner is being violated. A reference of the recent order dated 09.09.2024, passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No.8523/2024 titled as Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab , releasing the accused on bail due to non-conclusion of trial despite issuing directions that same is to be concluded within a period of five months, has been given. Therefore, in such circumstances, petitioner be released on bail.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, however, it is not disputed that the Investigation in the present FIR has not been completed so far, for one of another reason whatsoever may be and due to such reasons trial against the petitioner has also not been proceeded. There is no substantial progress in trial after recording the statement of Investigation Officer on 04.12.2024.

[CRLMB-818/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:9085]

(3 of 3)

Having considered the fact that due to non-completion of investigation in the FIR, criminal trial against the petitioner has not progresses substantially, as only the statement of Investigating Officer has been recorded so far, as also the nature of allegation against the petitioner and period of his custody for more than one year i.e. from 04.01.2024, but without commenting on merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to release petitioner on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the third bail application is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner Arjun Kumar Vishnoi S/o Shri Karnaram shall be released 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 as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

However, in addition to the usual terms and conditions, it is hereby directed that:

¶26

(i) Accused-petitioner shall not induce or influence or temper with any prosecution evidence/witness.

¶27

(ii) Accused-petitioner shall not repeat the similar nature of offence.

¶28

(iii) Accused-petitioner shall not leave District Ajmer without leave of the trial Court.

¶29

(iv) In case, accused-petitioner is found involved in similar offence, during bail granted by this Court or breach of conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail, granted by this Court.

¶30

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶31

NITIN /1

Arjun Kumar Vishnoi S/O Shri Karnaram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Kumar Vishnoi S/O Shri Karnaram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Estate Officer Under Public Premises Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Monika Maheshwari D/O Om Prakash Maheshwari Vs the Managing Director (Technical)

Rohit Sharma S/O Babulal Sharma Vs Babulal Sharma S/O Sh. Badri Prasad Khati

Saurabh Aswani S/O Shri Jai Kishan @ Rajkumar Aswani Vs Jai Kishan Aswani S/O Late Shri Kewal Ram

M/S Manoj Foods and Enterprises Vs the Secretary, Department of Local Bodies

Prakash Sukheja S/O Shri Kanhaiya Lal Vs State of Rajasthan