CRLMB/13237/2026 of RANVEER SINGH SHEKHAWAT S/O LATE SH. MAHENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 21 August 2026

Order

21/08/2026

1. The third bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Ranveer Singh S/o Late Shri Mahendra Singh, seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.65/2024 dated 20.02.2024 registered at P.S. Sadar Jaipur, District - Jaipur (West), for the offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no

(2 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026] more required in investigation. He further submitted that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He also submitted that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with trial, which will take time.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that on the basis of proposal submitted by the petitioner to the Bar Association, Jaipur and same has accepted with the approval of General House and parties have entered into compromise. He also submitted that on the basis of compromise, the trial court has dropped charge under Section 408 and 420 IPC. He also submitted that now the charges under Section 467, 468, 471 IPC are remaining against the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is in custody since his arrest on 05.10.2024.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application, but learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bar Association has no objection in case bail is allowed as parties have settled their dispute.

5. Heard learned counsel for parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record.

6. While considering the bail application on 16.09.2025, this Court has remitted as under:

11. The brief and relevant facts are that a complaint is filed by Pawan Sharma, the

(3 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026] then President and Raj Kumar Sharma, the then General Secretary of the Bar Association, Jaipur about misappropriation in the funds of the Bar Association, kept by Ranveer Singh (present petitioner). It is further alleged that duplicate receipt books and tickets were also used to collect funds. On basis of said report, FIR was registered at PS Sadar, Jaipur, District Jaipur (West) on 20.02.2024. The investigation is transferred to the SOG and after investigation, SOG has filed a charge-sheet against the present petitioner Ranveer Singh for offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC. The conclusion drawn by the Investigating Officer also indicate that it has inquired the role of Nawal Kishore Sharma, Anil, Manoj Kumar Sharma and others but neither any role and involvement nor abetement on their part is found proved. The list of witnesses enclosed with charge-sheet clearly indicate that 47 witnesses were named by police at the time of filing of charge-sheet.

12. A perusal of statement of Pawan Sharma, Rajkumar Sharma, Gajendra Singh Naruka, Arun Kumawat, Rishiraj Singh, Nawal Kishore Sharma, Manish Pareek recorded under Section 161 CrPC indicate that they fully corroborated the allegation against the present petitioner. The statement of Ashok Kumar Sain also indicate that he was also involved in accounting process and on previous occasion, he has not raised the issue to any

(4 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026] previous Executive body about present petitioner. The statement of employees of Bar Association such as Dharamveer, Rameshwarlal, Kailash, Triveni Kumar, Hariom, were also recorded by the Investigating Officer. Besides aforesaid statement of Mukesh Kumar, Shankar Lal, Sher Singh, Ashwini Kumar, Pravin Kumar, Omprakash, Kishanchand, Surendra Kumar, Nitin Kumar, Jai Kumar, Banwarilal, Vijay Prakash, Jagdish and Mohan Lal were also recorded by the Investigating Officer who in fact deposited licence fee to the Bar Association.

13. The Investigating Officer also recorded statement of lawyers Niraj Kumar, Bhagchand, Dron Kumar, Lokesh Singh, Satish Sharma and Sanjay Sharma and we have considered their statement in relation to role and involvement of present petitioner. The statement of Vinay Bansal, who is Auditor and appointed on instruction of SP, ATS has conducted forensic audit after segregating details of different years though serious objections were raised about the findings recorded n the audit report and at this stage we do not want to express our opinion as it is a call to be taken by the trial Court to decide role and involvement of the present petitioner.

14. It is also evident on record that Mr. Pawan Sharma and Rajkumar Sharma were elected on 09.12.2023 but prior to them there were many Presidents and Secretaries since 2016. If financial

(5 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026] irregularities and financial mismanagement is going on since 2016, then a call is required to be taken by the General House of the Bar Association, so that rivalry between leaders of lawyers may not result into a dirty game of settling scores. The statement of Investigating Officer before the Court indicated that during investigation he did not found any property in possession of the present petitioner including cash amount. His statement clearly indicate that the present petitioner has not diverted money to anyone then the question before us is whether the money is actually siphoned of, or whether it is misappropriated, by the petitioner. A question is raised about mass scale financial mismanagement.

15. During course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Senior Advocate appearing for the complainant (the Bar Association) have candidly admitted that these issues pertain to sentiment of 15000 to 19000 lawyers who are Members of the Bar Association and they have in deposited money to the Bar Association. The material available on record only pointed out that the present petitioner was involved in managing the account of the Bar Association. Therefore, his role and involvement as pointed out by the complainant at the time of filing of complaint and verified by the Investigating Officer is at last sufficient for trial of the case. The only question is how much

(6 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026] money was in fact collected by the Bar Association during said period and how many receipts were issued to the persons from whom collection was made. Similarly, whether this money in fact deposited in the account of Bar Association or same was misappropriated, and by whom. The money which was collected was in fact used for unaccounted expenditure or really misappropriated by the petitioner or by anybody else.

16. The petitioner accused has offered to deposit ₹25,00,000/- to settle the dispute and same is one of the circumstance against the petitioner as pointed out by learned Senior Advocate for the complainant. The material on record is sufficient to draw a conclusion that the accounts in the Bar Association, Jaipur at the time of registration of case were not properly managed and it has given room and scope for misappropriation of funds or incurring expenditure in uncontrollable and unaccountable manner. Considering the role and involvement of the present petitioner, it is very serious offence.

7. Now the Bar Association has accepted the proposal of petitioner and petitioner has deposited ₹31 lakhs with the Bar Association by way of three demand drafts, and after such deposition, the Bar Association has filed a compromise before learned trial court, which was attested for offence under Section 420 and 408 IPC. Now charges under Section 467, 468, and 471 IPC are

(7 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026] remaining against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 05.10.2024.

8. 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. 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 applicant-accused.

9. Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant-accused Ranveer Singh Shekhawat S/o Late Sh. Mahendra Singh Shekhawat, 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:-

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

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

(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.

(8 of 8) [CRLMB-13237/2026]

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

10. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J 159/PREETI VALECHA