Bail Cancellation Is Not an Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Cancel Anticipatory Bail in Fifteen-Year-Old Cheating Case

On the petitioner's complaint, an FIR was registered at Police Station Murlipura, Jaipur under BNS provisions on cheating and forgery (paras 1-2). On 24.10.2025 an Additional Sessions Judge granted the accused anticipatory bail (para 2). The complainant sought cancellation under Section 483(3) BNSS, calling the acts a premeditated design that the Sessions Judge had failed to appreciate; the State and the accused defended the order (paras 3-4).

The Sessions Judge had duly considered the FIR, the material on record and every submission; the grounds raised here had been raised and dealt with there (para 6). The bail order noted that a mediator's report, arbitration, the JDA and the NCLT had gone in the accused's favour, the latter finding no cheating; that the FIR came fifteen years after the occurrence without explanation; and the outcome of numerous earlier cases against him (paras 6.1-6.3). The Sessions Court's power under Section 482 BNSS is concurrent with the High Court's, and a cancellation plea cannot be examined as an appeal; the grounds for granting and for cancelling bail are distinct (paras 7-7.1). Relying on Bhagirath Singh Judeja, the Court restated the factors for bail (paras 8-8.1). The offences are triable by a Magistrate and do not carry death or life imprisonment, and an unexplained delayed FIR may suggest exaggeration (para 9). The discretion was exercised judiciously (para 10).