Allowed

Smt Prakashi and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC16 Nov 2017CRLMB/15534/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners arrested for cheating and forgery offences. They were directed to join the investigation and obtain prior permission before leaving the country.

What did the court decide?

Petition for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioners released on bail subject to conditions including joining investigation and not leaving the country without permission.

Smt Prakashi and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS BAIL NO. 15534/2017

¶4

Smt. Prakashi W/o Harish B/c Meena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Paadli, Police Station Balghat, Distt. Karauli (raj.) At Present Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Balghat, Distt. Karauli (raj.)

¶5

Bhoop Singh Gurjar S/o Kartar Singh B/c Gurjar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Tighariya, Teh. Hindauncity, Distt. Karauli, At Present Secretary, Gram Panchayat Balghat, Distt. Karauli (raj.)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

__________________________________________ For Petitioners : Mr. V.S. Chauhan For Respondent : Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, P.P.

¶11

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶12

Order

¶13

16/11/2017

¶14

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No. 06/2017 registered at Police Station Balghat, District karauli (Raj.) for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 471 & 120-B Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there was no occasion for the accused to have deposited money in the account of the complainant in the absence of the job performed by him with the gram panchayat on the muster roll basis. Petitioners are ready to join investigation.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the petition.

¶18

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to order the release of the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this petition is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioners be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. Petitioners shall join investigation as and when required by the police and shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶20

(SABINA)J.

¶21

Mohita/14

Smt Prakashi and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Prakashi and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Director General of Police and Ors. Vs Munna Lal

Balveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Govind Narain Goyal Vs State of Rajasthan Acb

Mukat Singh and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Dhanraj Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ramotar Meena and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp