Allowed

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/O Pratap Singh Budaniya v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Sept 2025CRLMB/9863/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail under Section 483 BNSS in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case registered on a two-year-delayed complaint. Accused in custody, charge-sheet filed, offence Magistrate-triable, no criminal antecedents; court granted bail with conditions without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions including non-tampering with evidence and trial attendance.

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/O Pratap Singh Budaniya… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:35694]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9863/2025

¶4

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/o Pratap Singh Budaniya, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Dandu, Police Station Sadar Churu, District Churu (Raj.) (At Present In District Jail, Jhunjhunu).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mahala For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order

¶11

04/09/2025

¶12

Instant application for bail is filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the applicant-accused Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/o Pratap Singh Budaniya in FIR No. 45/2025 dated 10.05.2025 registered at P.S. Malsisar District -Jhunjhunu, whereby the applicant-accused was charged under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC.

¶13

The applicant was arrested and is in judicial custody since his arrest. The Court below has dismissed the bail application.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant relying upon grounds raised in bail application submits that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. He also submitted that charge-sheet has been filed. He also submits that the trial will take its own time and no purpose will be served by keeping the applicant-accused in custody.

¶15

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that for financial transaction of July, 2023, report is registered in April, 2025

[2025:RJ-JP:35694]

[CRLMB-9863/2025]

(2 of 3)

almost after delay of 2 years. He further submitted that present petitioner is an employee in a grocery store and he has no connection to canvas the candidature of complainant. He further submitted that the complainant has admitted to know petitioner for last 10-15 years and further they are in relation of each other. He further submitted that there is no evidence about fake or false promise between the petitioner and complainant. He further referred material on record and submitted that except oral evidence and note executed under pressure, no other material is available to show involvement of petitioner. At last, he submitted that at the most, it is a case of civil nature and petitioner is in custody in a Magistrate triable offence.

¶20

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record.

¶22

On the basis of complaint by complainant, under Section 175(3) of BNSS for offence under Sections 318 and 316 of BNS about incident of July, 2023, the matter is registered and investigated. During investigation, police has found involvement of present petitioner and arrested petitioner on 16.07.2025. The police has filed charge-sheet and offence is triable by Magistrate. There is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner.

¶23

Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicant-accused is no more required in the investigation and he is in custody for quite some time.

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:35694]

[CRLMB-9863/2025]

The further proceedings will take its own time, therefore, looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the applicantaccused.

¶28

Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicantaccused Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/o Pratap Singh

¶29

Budaniya , 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:-

¶30

(i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner.

¶31

(ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law.

¶32

(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.

¶33

(iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the applicant-accused shall be liable to be canceled.

¶34

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail.

¶35

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶36

PREETI VALECHA /121

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/O Pratap Singh Budaniya v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Budaniya S/O Pratap Singh Budaniya v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monu @ Juber S/O Nasrudin Vs State of Rajasthan

Ravi Kumar S/O Shibbhuram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Yadav S/O Shri Mohan Lal Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeep Singh S/O Shri Prahlad Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkhiladi S/O Shri Shankarlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shakir Ali S/O Vishan Swaroop Vs State of Rajasthan