Allowed

Rajnish Goyal S/O Shri Kailash Chand Goyal B/C Goyal Mahajan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Oct 2019CRLBC/50/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court ordered cancellation of bail granted to two respondents in a criminal case for cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. Bail was revoked because bail relied on a false statement that a challan had been presented, when it had not.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to respondents no.2 & 3 by this court vide order dated 29.01.2019 is cancelled.

Rajnish Goyal S/O Shri Kailash Chand Goyal B/C Goyal… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Cancellation Application No. 50/2019

¶3

Rajnish Goyal S/o Shri Kailash Chand Goyal B/c Goyal Mahajan, Aged About 47 Years, R/o A/11 Swej Farm, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur Raj.

¶4

----Complainant-Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶7

Naresh S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal B/c Pareek, R/o Khatwadi Police Station Phulera District Jaipur.

¶8

Raju S/o Shri Hanuman Sahay B/c Pareek, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Bhagwada Police Station Harmada District Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. L.L. Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla for the State

¶11

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

01/10/2019

¶14

Petitioner has filed this petition seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondents no.2 & 3 by this court vide order dated 29.01.2019 in F.I.R. No.113/2018 registered at Police Station Sambhar, District Jaipur for offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondents no.2 & 3 had made mis-statement before this court at the time of the passing of the impugned order dated 29.01.2019 that challan had already been presented in the court, whereas, on the said date, challan has not been

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLBC-50/2019]

¶18

presented in the court. Respondents no.2 & 3 had executed sale deed with regard to the land owned by the petitioner on the basis of forged documents. In-fact, respondents no.2 & 3 were the attesting witnesses to the forged power of attorney which had been allegedly executed by the petitioner.

¶19

Learned state counsel has submitted that challan was presented against the respondents no.2 & 3 on 01.04.2019. It has also been pointed out by the learned state counsel that the respondents no.2 & 3 were arrested on 2.1.2019.

¶20

None has appeared on behalf of respondents no.2 & 3 despite service.

¶21

Since, in the present case, mis-statement had been made before this court at the time of passing of the order dated 29.01.2019 to the effect that challan had been presented in the court, whereas, challan had not been presented in the court on the said date, the bail granted to respondents no.2 & 3 is liable to be cancelled.

¶22

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Bail granted to respondents no.2 & 3 by this court vide order dated 29.01.2019, is cancelled.

¶23

Mohita /19

Rajnish Goyal S/O Shri Kailash Chand Goyal B/C Goyal Mahajan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnish Goyal S/O Shri Kailash Chand Goyal B/C Goyal Mahajan v. State of Rajasthan

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

Saddam Khan S/O Shri Mammandeen B/C Mev Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Hussain@Minta S/O Ramjani B/C Musalman Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak@Gappi S/O Ramjanam Singh B/C Rajput Vs State of Rajasthan

Sumer Singh Vs Sohan Lal and Ors.

Rajesh S/O Kaluram B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Dilkhush S/O Jagdish B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan