Allowed

Anita v. State

Rajasthan HC6 Sept 2017CRLMB/7115/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court accepted a preponing application and heard a bail petition. Relying on a coordinate bench order regarding settled debts and a conditional compromise, the court conditionally allowed bail, requiring a personal bond and stipulating bail cancellation if a cheque is dishonoured.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 2 Lacs and two surety bonds of Rs. 1 Lac each, with stipulation of bail cancellation if the cheque of Rs. 36 lacs is dishonoured.

Anita Vs State — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Application Criminal No. 1125 / 2017

¶3

¶4

S.B.Cr. Misc. II Bail Application No. 7115/2017

¶5

Anita D/o Sh. Vijay Kumar, by caste Rajput, Resident of House No. 13/38-DLF Phase First Gurgaon, Haryana.

¶6

(Presently lodged in Central Jail, Bikaner)

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Menaria

¶12

For Respondent(s) : Mr. O.P.Rathi, P.P. For Complainant : Mr. N.S.Rathore

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

¶14

Judgment / Order

¶15

06/09/2017

¶16

I.A. No. 1125/2017 filed by learned counsel Mr. Deepak Menaria for preponing the date is accepted. The matter is heard today itself with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in relation to F.I.R. No.481/2016, Police Station Sadar, Dist. Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and u/s. 66A (c) 66C, 66D of Information and Technology Act, 2000 and u/s. 12(1A)(B) of Passport Act, 1967.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[APPLR-1125/2017]

¶21

Learned counsel Mr. Menaria has drawn attention of the Court to the order dated 1.9.2017 passed by the coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Sharwan Singh co-accused.

¶22

On perusal of the said order, it is manifest that the entire amount of which the complainant was cheated has been agreed to be returned to her. Part amount has been paid in cash and the balance of Rs. 36 lacs has been covered by a post dated cheque. The complainant has executed a conditional compromise with the accused stating therein that in case the cheque is dishonoured, she will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail granted to the accused.

¶23

In view of these facts and developments, the second bail application deserves to be accepted conditionally.

¶24

Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner namely Anita arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.481/2016, Police Station Sadar, Dist. Bikaner shall be released on bail; provided she furnishes a personal bond of Rs. Two Lacs and two surety bonds of Rs. One Lac each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. It is made clear that the applicant is given the liberty of bail with a stipulation that in case the cheque of Rs. 36 lacs is dishonoured, the complainant will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail granted to the applicant

¶25

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

¶26

/sushil/

Anita v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anita v. State

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

Smt. Neelam Bhatia Vs Mangilal

Sudhir Kumar Vs Rashid Ali

Manjeet Singh Vs State

State Vs Chandu Ram

Surtaram and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Nathu Ram Vs State