Allowed

Arjun@Bablu S/O Madanlal B/C Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC18 Jul 2018CRLMB/6361/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench allowed the second bail application of the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. despite prior dismissal in default, noting lack of direct evidence and petitioner's acquittal in previous similar cases, subject to bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Arjun@Bablu S/O Madanlal B/C Gurjar Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail No. 6361/2018

¶3

Arjun @ Bablu S/o Madanlal, B/c Gurjar, Age 24 years, R/o Near Jagdish Ji Temple, Goner, Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur.

¶4

(At present confined in Central Jail Ghatgate, Jaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor

¶8

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raj Kumar Lalwani For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrimali, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

¶10

Order

¶11

18/07/2018

¶12

The present Misc. II bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the Accused/ petitioner in the matter of FIR No. 442/2016 registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, for offences punishable under Sections 392 and 384 of IPC.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier bail application of present petitioner was dismissed in default vide order dated 09.08.2017. Thereafter, this second bail application is preferred.

¶14

He submits that in this matter petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2016 and no iota of evidence is there against the present petitioner to connect him with the alleged offence. He submits that the recovery of golden chain is effected on instance of co-accused Bhuli Devi from Manappuram Finance Limited and petitioner was implicated only on the interrogation report of co-accused.

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLMB-6361/2018]

¶17

He further submits that identification parade was also not conducted for identification of the present petitioner and investigation has been completed, therefore petitioner may be released on bail.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that total 31 criminal cases are registered against the present petitioner, therefore his bail application may be rejected.

¶19

In replica, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of 31 criminal cases, petitioner has acquitted in 25 criminal cases and now only six criminal cases are pending including present one against the present petitioner.

¶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, therefore without expressing any final opinion on the merit and de-merit of the case and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the material collected during investigation by the Investigating Officer, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the accused-petitioner.

¶22

Consequently, the second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶23

Therefore, it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Arjun @ Bablu S/o Madanlal in FIR No. 442/2016 registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000/- 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.

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CRLMB-6361/2018]

¶26

If in future, involvement of present petitioner is found in any other similar type of criminal case, then concern S.H.O. will have liberty to file application before the learned Trial Court for cancellation of this bail order and learned Trial Court will have liberty to cancel this bail order without further reference to this Court.

¶27

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J

¶28

S. Kumawat/49

Arjun@Bablu S/O Madanlal B/C Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun@Bablu S/O Madanlal B/C Gurjar 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

Sunita Shukla Vs Bhagwati Devi and Ors.

Jagdish Naryan Jeman Vs Ram Swaroop and Ors.

National Highway Authority of India Vs Arbitrator-Distt Collector Jaipur and Ors.

Hari Singh Yadav Vs Bishamber Dayal

U O I through Chief Admn Officer Railway Vs M/S Giriraj Civil Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Shyokaran and Ors. Vs Sukhdev and Anr.