Allowed

Manju v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Jul 2019CRLMB/4276/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application, the petitioner apprehended arrest for alleged offences under IPC Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, and 471 involving a gift deed obtained by her son. The High Court, considering the totality of facts, granted bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. directing her to furnish a bond and comply with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed provided petitioner furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each and complies with framed conditions.

Manju Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4276/2019

¶3

Manju W/o Late Sh. Sushil Agarwal, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of B-1, Shastri Nagar, P N T Circle, Jodhpur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶10

Order

¶11

19/07/2019

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with FIR No.374/2018 of Police Station Udaimandir, Jodhpur for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that allegation against the petitioner is to the effect that co-accused person Abhilav Agarwal had executed a gift deed in favour of her of a land which he had already sold to the complainant. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, she was not aware about the fact that her son co-accused Abhilav Agarwal had already executed an agreement for sale of the land which later on, he has gifted to her through a gift deed. It is also submitted that

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMB-4276/2019]

¶17

whatever has been done was done by co-accused Abhilav Agarwal and she had not committed any crime.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶19

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

¶20

of the case and taking into consideration the fact that the land was in the name of Abhilav Agarwal and he executed an agreement with the complainant to sell it, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶21

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Manju W/o Late Sh. Sushil Agarwal in FIR No.374/2018 of Police Station Udaimandir, Jodhpur of Police Station she shall be enlarged on bail provided she furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureities of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./S.H.O. on the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) She shall make herself available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required;

¶23

(ii) She 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 to any Police Officer;

¶24

(iii) She shall not leave India without the previous permission of

¶25

the court.

¶26

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶27

50-Taruna/-

Manju v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manju 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

Manoj Vs State of Rajasthan

Satveer @ Fauzi Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurdeep Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Ankit Punia Vs State

Kump Singh Vs State

Smt Jaishree Rathore Vs State