Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Shyam Lal Meena S/O Shri Gulab Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 April, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:13734]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 1726/2026
Shyam Lal Meena S/o Shri Gulab Meena, R/o Village
Chhatarpura, Post Dantali, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
(Presently accused-petitioner is confined in Central Jail, Jaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP
Mr. Deepak Sharma for Complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA
Order
1. Date of conclusion of Arguments 06.04.2026
2. Date on which the judgment was 06.04.2026
reserved
3. Whether the full judgment or only Full
operative part is pronounced
4. Date of pronouncement 23.04.2026
1. The petitioner has filed this second bail application under
Section 483 B.N.S.S. after his first bail application was dismissed
as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2025.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Deepak Chauhan,
submitted that the complainant has lodged the impugned FIR
bearing No.0210/2022 dated 10.06.2022 for the offences under
Sections 323, 341, 384, 420, 406, 120-B & 506 of IPC at Police
Station Ram Nagaria, Jaipur City (East). Learned counsel further
submitted that it has been stated in the FIR that the complainant
purchased the plot bearing No. C-78 through registered sale deed
dated 30.07.2014 in the Residential Scheme namely, Sh. Narsingh
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (2 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
Arcade floated by a private Residential Housing Society known as
Narsingh Developers and Colonizers Private Limited (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the housing society’).
3. Mr. Deepak Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner further
submitted that the complainant has alleged that when he tried to
enter into his property bearing No. C-78 on 24.04.2022, he was
obstructed by the persons as named in the FIR including the
present petitioner as they were not allowing him to enter into the
plot. Also, the petitioner had raised a boundary wall surrounding
the plot and not allowing the complainant to construct his house.
He further stated that accused-person are threatening him to
surrender the papers of the plot and forcing him to sell the said
plot to them and in view thereof, he filed the impugned FIR at the
police station.
4. Learned counsel submitted that, police after conducting the
investigation, has filed the charge-sheet bearing No.1/25 dated
28.12.2025 for offences under Sections 420, 406, 120-B & 384
IPC. He further submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do
with the alleged offences, as the land in controversy belongs to his
father and other relatives, who are khatedars and owners of the
land however, they did some transactions with the above named
Housing Society in the past. Learned counsel submitted that
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the
impugned FIR. Learned counsel further stated that the petitioner
is behind the bars since 31.10.2025 and other co-accused persons
have already been enlarged on bail either by the learned trial
Court or the Coordinate Bench of this Court. In view thereof, it is
prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (3 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
5. This Court, while dismissing the first bail application vide
order dated 17.12.2025, noted that there are as many as seven
FIRs including the present one against the present petitioner and
other persons who are also khatedars. All the FIRs were registered
in the year 2022 and 2023, at the same Police Station with the
same allegation. Considering the fact that so many FIRs were
registered against the present petitioner and co-accused persons
and in some of the matters police also noted some serious
collusion between the present accused-petitioner and the other
persons including the housing society, therefore, this Court
directed the Investigating Officer of the said case to appear before
the Court. In compliance of order dated 06.03.2026, Investigating
Officer appeared before the Court and informed that the petitioner,
son of one of the khatedars namely Gulab Meena who along with
other khatedars, sold the land to the private Housing Society and
has received a sum of Rs.8,62,000/- per bigha and the said
amount was paid by the Housing Society to the father of the
petitioner and other khatedars, with a receipt of Bank transaction,
in terms of coordination and understanding between the khatedars
and the Housing Society. It has been informed that the land was
surrendered by the khatedars as per undertstanding with the
Housing Society before the J.D.A. for the proceedings under 90-B
of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 and thereafter, the
pattas were issued for the plots by the housing society as per
understanding between khatedars and the housing society. The
Investigating Officer further informed that the housing society
with the consent, understanding and total co-ordination of the
other khatedars sold the respective plots and issued the
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (4 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
possession letter along with site plan to the respective plot-
holders. However, after issuance of pattas and possession letter to
the respective plot-holders, on the basis of registered sale deed
and agreement to sale etc., when the respective plot- holders tried
to enter their respective plots, the petitioner and other khatedars
obstructed the plot-holders and did not allow them to take
possession and construct their houses, despite the fact that they
have already paid the due complete consideration to the housing
society.
6. This Court, while interacting with the Investigating Officer,
noted that the Investigating Officers, who were posted at that
relevant time in the past did not conduct fair and proper
investigation in all the FIRs and there appears to be a serious
collusion between the Investigating Officer, the khatedars and the
Housing Society.
7. This Court also heard Public Prosecutor as well as the learned
counsel for complainant and after hearing the same, noted certain
serious facts in the matter.
8. This Court noted that the allegations made in all the FIRs are
virtually the same as the petitioner stepped into his father’s shoes
and further, because his father, the khatedar – Gulab Meena, an
illiterate man, so he actually did all the documentation and
transaction and therefore, did not allow the respective plot-holders
to enter into their property and make the construction. The
Housing Society created/issued pattas for almost 350 plots out of
which 77 plots were sold to employees of the Railway Department
and took money from almost all the plot-holders. On one hand,
this Court, while carefully considering the conclusion as recorded
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (5 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
by the Investigating Officer in FIR bearing No. 210/2022 dated
10.06.2022 in the Charge-sheet No. 1/25, dated 28.12.2025,
noted that the khatedars and the Housing Society executed
various documents, which includes Power of Attorney, Agreement
to Sale, Memorandum of Understanding, Development Agreement
etc. for selling of the entire land. As per mutual understanding
between the parties (khatedar and the housing society), pattas of
the 350 Plots, as per the Charge-sheet, were issued by the
Narsingh Arcade Housing Society and money was taken from the
plot holders and also passed on to the khatedars in cash as well as
in their Bank Account. A huge amount was exchanged in cash by
the khatedars and the Housing Society.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Deepak Chauhan,
stated that they have not sold any land to the Housing Society or
to any other person and the petitioner and other khatedars are
still the owners of the land, who are also in possession of the
same. However, learned counsel failed to satisfy this Court as to
how such a huge amount of money, which also includes heavy
cash transactions, was taken by khatedars from the Housing
Society, when according to them, no transaction has taken place
between them. Once they have received said amount through
cash and in their Bank accounts also, he failed to satisfy this Court
that how no transaction can be said to have taken place between
them in respect of land in dispute. This clearly shows that false
statements were made in bail application during the course of
arguments.
10. From the contents of the multiple FIRs as lodged against the
petitioner and other khatedars, which transpires that khatedars,
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (6 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
after taking money from the housing society, who have also
earned their respective shares, are still not giving possession to
the respective plot-holders, including the present complainant
herein and threatening the plot-holders. Despite such serious
allegations in respect of 350 plots, which make the complete issue
serious in nature, this Court finds that the investigation by all
previous Investigative Officers have not been done fairly.
11. On the query raised by this Court, what action was taken by
petitioner against the society, if the petitioner and other khatedars
have not sold any land to the Housing Society? In response, Mr.
Deepak Chauhan, submitted that they lodged various FIRs against
the Housing Society in the year 2020-21, long before the FIRs
were lodged against them by the plot-holders. Mr. Chauhan,
informed this Court that first FIR was lodged bearing No. 34/2020
for offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and
Section 3(1)(f) & 3(1)(g) of SC/ST Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015)
alleging therein that certain persons tried to encroach upon their
land. In the other FIRs also, the allegations were leveled against
the Housing Society, however, in all these FIR, as per learned
counsel, police has submitted the Final Report and the protest
petition has been filed by the petitioner and other khatedars,
which is pending before the concerned Court.
12. It is surprising and shocking, as this Court noted that, the
petitioner, and other khatedars, have sold their land to the
housing society and took huge amount against 350 plots on the
basis of valuation, as jointly assessed by them, and submitted the
papers to JDA for conversion of land. On that basis, the Housing
Society sold the plots and issued Pattas and possession letters,
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (7 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
however, now in collusion with the Society, the petitioner and
other khatedars are obstructing plot-holders from entering into
their properties. In case, the FIRs lodged by the khatedars against
the Housing Society are genuine, the petitioner and the other
khatedars ought to have taken some serious actions. The
complainant and the other plot-holders have been cheated by
petitioner and other khatedars in collusion with the Housing
Society, as they have lost their hard earned money and despite
having the documents of possession and pattas issued by the
Society in their name, they cannot enter into their property.
13. Mr. Chauhan, tried to impress this Court by submitting that
petitioner has not executed any document and all the offences are
triable by Magistrate, and some of the accused persons have
already been enlarged on bail either by the learned trial Court or
by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Therefore, petitioner may
also be granted the benefit of bail while maintaining parity with
other co-accused persons.
14. However, this Court finds the allegations made against the
petitioner are serious in nature and not properly investigated by
the police, who did not act fairly during the course of
investigation. Mr. Chauhan failed to dispute the fact that
petitioner’s father Gulab Meena entered into the agreement dated
24.04.2003 with the Housing Society, the father of the petitioner
gave a registered Power of Attorney dated 05.08.2004, which
bears photograph, bio-metrics, thumb impression of the khatedar
Gulab Meena along with signatures of other khatedars. The
contents of the Power of Attorney dated 05.08.2004 shows that
the khatedhar Gulab Meena authorized the Director of the housing
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (8 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
society to issue provisional pattas, receipts and site plans, except
to receive the money, and to take all the necessary actions in
respect of the said land before various Government Departments.
It is in pursuance to Power of Attorney that the Housing Society
and the Colonizer acted and undertook necessary steps, including
surrender of land before the JDA for conversion under Section 90B
of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 and thereafter, issued
the pattas to the plot-holders and collected money.
15. The Bank statement produced before this Court by the
counsel for the complainant remained undisputed, which clearly
indicates that complete amount received by respective khatedars
from the Colonizer between the period from 2003 onwards.
Various other documents were also placed on record including a
document titled as Pratigya Patra dated 14.08.2020, executed
between the khatedars including the present petitioner and one
Prem Surana whereby the khatedars have now sold the land to
new person namely Prem Surana, conferring all the rights upon
said the person, as per terms of the agreement.
16. This Court also considered the list of plot-holders, which
bears the names of various persons. Another important and
interesting fact has been noted by this Court that nowadays the
khatedars of the land, while presenting themselves to be innocent,
first enters into agreement with the Housing Societies and then
sells the plots to the innocent people and after taking
consideration amount, they sell the plot further to second and
third party. Thereafter, they try to give the complete issue a
picture of the civil dispute by filing civil suits and writ petitions so
that the action in respect of the criminal offence may not be taken
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:13734] (9 of 9) [CRLMB-1121/2026]
against them. By adopting such kind of modus operandi, action of
the khatedars shows clear fraud upon innocent persons, who
purchased the plots after paying the relevant consideration,
relying upon documents, assurances and verification from the JDA
and other local authorities, are put to grave loss.
17. In view of the above discussion, this Court finds that the
present petitioner, being son of the khatedar Gulab Meena, who
was 60 years old and an illiterate man in the year 2004, had his
serious involvement in the present dispute and considering the
same, this Court is not inclined to exercise its power under Section
483 BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
18. Consequently, the criminal misc. second bail application is
dismissed.
(RAVI CHIRANIA),J
RAVI KHANDELWAL/226-S
(Uploaded on 28/04/2026 at 11:17:45 AM)
(Downloaded on 28/04/2026 at 10:35:00 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
