Rajesh Kumar Gehlot vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:1441)
2026 Latest Caselaw 335 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rajesh Kumar Gehlot vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:1441) on 12 January, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2026:RJ-JD:1441]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 283/2025

Rajesh Kumar Gehlot S/o Shri Amrumal Gehlot, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Behind Railway Club, Ward No. 13, Post Ratangarh,
District Churu, Rajasthan.
                                                                     ----Appellant
                                     Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Gajanand S/o Shri Chunnilal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
         Behind     Railway     Hospital,       Ratangarh,        District   Churu,
         Rajasthan.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)           :     Mr. Gaurav Maru
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. NS Chandawat, PP



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

12/01/2026

1. The present application seeking leave to appeal has been

placed before this Court for consideration.

2. It is trite that the grant of leave to appeal is a condition

precedent for the admission of an appeal and such leave is neither

automatic nor a matter of right, but rests within the discretionary

jurisdiction of the appellate Court. The purpose of seeking leave is

to obtain the Court's permission to assail the impugned judgment

before the appeal is formally entertained.

3. At the stage of consideration of leave, the Court is not

expected to undertake a detailed examination of the merits of the

case. The scope of scrutiny is confined to ascertaining whether the

proposed appeal discloses arguable issues, raises substantial

(Uploaded on 13/01/2026 at 05:55:31 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:1441] (2 of 2) [CRLLA-283/2025]

questions of law or fact, or otherwise demonstrates sufficient

cause warranting appellate interference

4. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment, it is revealed that a

cheque was allegedly issued by the accused-respondent in favour

of the petitioner, which, upon presentation, came to be

dishonoured on the ground of "Insufficiency of Funds" in the

account of the accused. From the material placed on record, this

Court finds that reasonable grounds exist to permit the appellant

to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment.

5. This Court is satisfied that the proposed challenge is neither

frivolous nor vexatious and that the issues raised deserve

consideration by the appellate Court.

6. Accordingly, the instant application seeking leave to appeal is

allowed. The memo of leave to appeal shall be treated as an

appeal and shall be registered as such.

7. Opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the respondent at

the time of hearing on the question of admission of the appeal.

8. Office is directed to proceed in accordance with law.

(FARJAND ALI),J 43-chhavi/-

(Uploaded on 13/01/2026 at 05:55:31 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)