Niranjan Kumar Son of Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2026)

Niranjan Kumar Son of Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail allowed: in the event of arrest in FIR No. 225/2024 (P.S. Shivdaspura, Jaipur South), the petitioner is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each, subject to the three conditions recorded in para 7 of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioner, who was not named in FIR No. 225/2024 (offences u/S 143, 323, 341 & 379 IPC, P.S. Shivdaspura, Jaipur South) and who, pursuant to the Court's order dated 02.12.2025, had already appeared before and been interrogated by the Investigating Officer, should be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail under S. 482 BNSS.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration that the accused-petitioner was not named in the FIR and had already appeared before and been interrogated by the Investigating Officer pursuant to the Court's direction, the Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deemed it just and proper to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to him.

Ratio / Principle

The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur (South), FIR No. 225/2024, is directed that in the event of arrest the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each, subject to conditions: (i) availability for interrogation as and when required; (ii) no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure to the court or police; and (iii) not leaving India without prior permission of the court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — S. 482 BNSS — petitioner not named in FIR No. 225/2024 (P.S. Shivdaspura, Dist. Jaipur South; offences u/S 143, 323, 341 & 379 IPC); acting on the Court's order dated 02.12.2025 he appeared before the Investigating Officer and was interrogated; the Public Prosecutor verified the interrogation though he opposed the application; the Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, extended the benefit of anticipatory bail — in the event of arrest, release on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each, subject to conditions of availability for interrogation, abstention from inducement/threat/promise, and no departure from India without prior permission of the court.

[2026:RJ-JP:1188]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13764/2025

Niranjan Kumar Son Of Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of 468, Khangaro Ka Mohalla, Jhilai Niwai Tonk Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan, through PP

		----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Anoop Pareek Mr. Kshitiz Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. A.K. Gupta,PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Order

12/01/2026

This anticipatory bail application is filed by the accused petitioner u/S 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 225/2024 registered at police station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur (South) for offences u/S 143, 323, 341 & 379 IPC.

Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

On perusal of the contents of the FIR, it is revealed that the accused petitioner has not been named in the FIR. The Court, vide order dated 02.12.2025, had directed the accused petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer.

Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the accused petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:1188]

[CRLMB-13764/2025]

and has been interrogated. It is also submitted that after joining the investigation, the petitioner is not more required for any kind of interrogation and recovery.

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application and also verified the fact that under the direction of this Court, the accused petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer and has been interrogated.

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that the accused petitioner has not been named in the FIR and he has already appeared before the Investigating Officer who has interrogated him, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur (South) in FIR No. 225/2024 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to his satisfaction on the following conditions:-

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

(ii) that the petitioner 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

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-13764/2025]

[2026:RJ-JP:1188]

disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

Gaurav Srivastava /163