Disposing of an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 CrPC, the Court dismissed the application, holding that no ground was made out due to the seriousness of the allegations involving forgery and cheating.
Application for anticipatory bail dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(1 of 1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 13695/2017
Poonam Chand Sahu S/o Mr. Madan Lal, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Pancholi Chauraha, Ramnagar, Ajmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner :
Mr. Nitish Bagri
For Respondent : Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, P.P.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Order
02/11/2017
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No.90/2016 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Ajmer for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 120-B Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Heard.
As per the prosecution story, petitioner on the basis of power of attorney, has cheated the complainant to the tune of Rupees ninty one lacs by executing the sale deed on the basis of forged documents.
Keeping in view the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to him is made out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA)J.
Mohita/20
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail given the serious allegations of cheating and forgery.
Poonam Chand Sahu
State of Rajasthan
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
