Allowed

Chetan Lal Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC19 Dec 2017CRLMB/17046/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner in respect of FIR No. 10/2006 for cheating and forgery offenses, directing the IO to release him on bail upon furnishing security and complying with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner directed to furnish personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each; release on bail if arrested subject to conditions.

Chetan Lal Kumawat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 17046 / 2017

¶3

Chetan Lal Kumawat S/o Shri Kalyan Sahai B/c Kumawat, R/o Plot No.1, Mahadev Nagar, Nandpuri Road, 22 Godam, Jaipur, Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan Through PP.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Azad Ahmed For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP Mr. Arvind Soni

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MAHESHWARI

¶10

Judgment / Order

¶11

19/12/2017

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

Apprehending his arrest, the accused-petitioner has filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in respect of FIR No. 10/2006 registered at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Jaipur for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cognizance has been taken against him on the complaint filed on 21.12.2005 after twelve years vide order dated 04.02.2017. He submits that initially the dispute was in between his father Kalayn Sahai and the complainant Smt. Lata Pandey, which is evident by the order dated 24.09.2004 passed by Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies. Later on, petitioner Chetan Lal Kumawat has been falsely implicated in the matter.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMB-17046/2017]

¶17

Learned cousnel for the complainant submits that it was petitioner Chetanlal, who got fabricated document prepared, for which the cognizance has been taken againt him.

¶18

Having regard to the arguments advanced and the material made available for my perusal, but without expressing any final opinion on the merit and de-merit of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant indulgence of anticipatory bail to the petitioner Chetan Lal Kumawat S/o Kalyan Sahai.

¶19

Consequently, the application for anticipatory bail is allowed.

¶20

The I.O., Police Station Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur in F.I.R. No.10/2006 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Chetan Lal Kumawat S/o Kalyan Sahai, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each to his satisfaction on the following conditions :-

¶21

(i). that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii). that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

¶22

(iii). that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶23

(DEEPAK MAHESHWARI)J.

¶24

Arun/80

Chetan Lal Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chetan Lal Kumawat 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

Gaurav Agarwal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Kamlesh Chand Agarwal Vs State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.

Pramod Kumar Nigam and Ors. Vs Nawal Singh and Ors.

Smt Durga Devi Vs State Education Department Ors.

Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Ganeshram Mehra Vs State Education Department Ors.