Allowed

Chandra Bhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC3 May 2018CRLMB/5443/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner in a case involving Sections 420 and 406 IPC. The court noted the matter pertains to a civil dispute over an agreement to sell. Bail was granted subject to conditions including appearance before the IO within one month.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner to appear before IO within one month; released on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties.

Chandra Bhan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 5443/2018

¶3

Chandra Bhan Singh S/o Shri Madhosingh B/c Rajput, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 16-A, Sarvodaya Nagar Vistar, Harnathpura, Niwaru Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shivendra Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶10

Order

¶11

03/05/2018

¶12

Petitioner has filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶13

F.I.R. No. 23/2018 was registered at Police Station Kardhani (West) Jaipur for offence under Sections 420, 406 of I.P.C.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that matter pertains to a civil dispute. An agreement to sale was executed between complainant and the petitioner. Complainant has paid advance amount and was required to pay balance amount by a particular date and when the balance amount was not paid a notice was given to the complainant.

¶15

It is contended that agreement to sale with Aadesh Singh was cancelled, prior to the entering of the present agreement. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMB-5443/2018]

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the anticipatory bail application.

¶19

I have considered the contentions.

¶20

Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the anticipatory bail application.

¶21

The anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Kardhani (West) Jaipur in F.I.R. No. 23/2018 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner 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 :-

¶22

(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

¶23

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

¶24

However, petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within one month from today, failing which the anticipatory bail application shall stand dismissed without reference to the Bench.

¶25

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶26

Amit/104

Chandra Bhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Bhan Singh 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

Ramkishan Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mamta Rani Vs Smt Veenu Gupta and Ors.

Sharda Vs Naresh Gangwar and Ors.

Dheer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Santosh Saini Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Mudit Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp