Allowed

Kailash Yadav and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC27 Jan 2017CRLMB/521/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Rajasthan High Court allowed bail to two accused persons in an FIR pertaining to shady currency note transactions. The court released them on personal bond with sureties despite police contention. Relief includes appearance before trial court.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 and two surety bonds of Rs. 1,00,000 each to satisfy trial court.

Kailash Yadav and Anr. 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 Application No. 521/ 2017

¶3

1. Kailash Yadav S/o Shri Sundarlal B/c Yadav (Ahir), R/o Anantpura, Tehsil Shri Madhopur, District Sikar, Raj.

¶4

2. Santosh Yadav S/o Shri Sundarlal B/c Yadav (Ahir), R/o Anantpura, Tehsil Shri Madhopur, District Sikar, Raj. (Presently Confined in Central Jail, Sikar).

¶5

----Petitioners/Accused

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Sharma on behalf of Mr. Ashutosh Bhatia Public Prosecutor : Mr. Rajender Raghav Investigating Officer : Mr. Karni Singh, SHO, Police Station Sadar Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

27/01/2017

¶13

The present Misc bail application under section 439

¶14

Cr.P.C. is preferred by the Accused/ petitioners Kailash Yadav and Santosh Yadav in the matter of FIR No. 371/2016 registered at Police Station Sadar Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar for offences punishable under Sections 395 and 120-B IPC.

¶15

Learned Counsel for petitioners Mr. Ramesh Sharma submits that petitioners are known to complainant

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CRLMB-263/2017]

¶18

and they have not been named in FIR subsequently complainant developed his story in statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he implicated petitioners. He submits that no test identification parade was conducted regarding present petitioners and no recovery was effected from present petitioners, recovery was effected from Rajender Yadav and Manju @ Pawan, petitioners are in custody since 18.12.2016, they have been implicated falsely in this case, the dispute is regarding changing of currency notes, therefore petitioners may be released on bail.

¶19

Investigating Officer Mr. Karni Singh, SHO, Police Station Sadar Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar is present in person. On instructions of aforesaid SHO, Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Rajender Raghav submits that it is true that petitioners are known to complainant and he didn’t named them in FIR but subsequently in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. he named the present petitioners and Rajender and Santosh. He fairly admitted that no recovery was effected from the present petitioners, as such he opposed the bail application.

¶20

I have considered the submissions made at bar.

¶21

On consideration of submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and the material made available for my perusal and without expressing any final opinion on the merit

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

[CRLMB-263/2017]

¶24

and de-merit of the case and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the accused-petitioners Kailash Yadav and Santosh Yadav.

¶25

Consequently, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. of accused-petitioners Kailash Yadav and Santosh Yadav is allowed.

¶26

Therefore, it is ordered that the accused-petitioners Kailash Yadav and Santosh Yadav in FIR No. 371/2016 registered at Police Station Sadar Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar, shall be released on bail; provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lakhs) each and two surety bonds of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA)J.

¶28

Charu 148

Kailash Yadav and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Yadav 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

Parwati Soni Vs Vinay Kumar Soni

Sunil Kumar Verma Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Kamal Kishore Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Yasir Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Kesar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Arjun Harijan Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp