[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sewa Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:8202) on 13 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:8202]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14001/2025
Sewa Lal S/o Kika Bhabhor, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Handi P.s.
Sallopat District Banswara (Lodged In Dist. Jail Banswara)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14000/2025
Ramesh Kumar S/o Bheeka Ram Alias Bheekha Ram Godara,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o Godawas Kala, P.s. Kalyanpura District
Balotra (Lodged In Dist. Jail Banswara)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.S. Choudhary, Sr., Adv. With
Mr. Doulat Ram
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh, PP with
Mr. O.P. Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
13/02/2026
1. This application for bail has been filed by the petitioners
under Section 483 of BNSS (old Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) in
connection with FIR No. 107/2024 dated 22.06.2024, Police
Station Kasarwadi, District Banswara, for the offences under
Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC and 66(D) of I.T.
Act and 3,4,6,7,10 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Measures for
Prevention of Unfair Means in Recruitment) Act, 2022.
(Uploaded on 13/02/2026 at 02:47:20 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8202] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14001/2025]
2. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely
implicated in the case and false allegations have been levelled
against them. The allegation in the FIR is that one Devi Lal, who
got selected as a teacher, had asked someone to impersonate him
in the written examination. The entire allegation in the FIR is on
co-accused Virendra who demanded a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- for
arranging some person who could appear on behalf of Devi Lal. He
submits that the beneficiary in the entire incident is co-accused
Devi Lal who has already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application
No.13504/2024 vide order dated 06.11.2024. He also submits
that petitioners have been connected in the present crime based
on a telephonic conversation. However, there is no other evidence
which could connect the present petitioners with the present crime
in question. The petitioners are in judicial custody since
06.10.2025 and the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore,
they deserve to be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail
application, however, fairly concedes that the beneficiary of the
entire incident has already been enlarged on bail.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public
Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan papers
so also the fact that co-accused Devi Lal has already been
enlarged on bail and the principal allegation is against Virendra
Kumar Maida, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful
(Uploaded on 13/02/2026 at 02:47:20 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8202] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14001/2025]
purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners behind the
bars for an indefinite period as the trial will take sufficiently long
time. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of
the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed
by the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
6. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of
BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioners- Ramesh Kumar
S/o Bheeka Ram Alias Bheekha Ram Godara and Sewa Lal
S/o Kika Bhabhor, shall be released on bail in connection with
the aforesaid FIR; provided they execute personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureties of
Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for their
appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing
and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
7. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations
made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail
application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J
5 & 7-AbhishekK/-
(Uploaded on 13/02/2026 at 02:47:20 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
