Partly allowed

Dheeraj Wadiya S/O Surajmal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC27 Jun 2019CRLMB/6113/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court bench allowed a bail application under Section 439 CrPC. The petitioner sought relief against an FIR registered for cheating offences. While the FIR was noted as belated pertaining to a 2016 land transaction, the court granted bail subject to personal bond. The court did not comment on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to furnishing of personal bond to the satisfaction of the learned police officer.

Dheeraj Wadiya S/O Surajmal Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6113/2019

¶3

Dheeraj Wadiya S/o Surajmal, R/o Mali Mohalla, Bazar No. 2, Ramganjmandi, Distt. Kota Raj. (At Present In Jail At Ramganjmandi)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. $2 ffN-3
kB - +d gt ----Respondent
. c-2 a. .wr --JY .-
LL.. " - p '?
For etition.er@?' -% $. : Mr. Sajid Ali Adv. "- LT , .;, s I' .?>
For eso.nd,ant(s) d : Mr. S.S. Ola, P.P. i :+,/
r" 3
i.s f.
-+.r--
'.r~ r i
'p r2

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICLGiR YOOLCHANDANI .b (V J ) ,&%%I. $F;+ s? 4

¶8

Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1 ular bail in F.I.R. No. 281/2018 registered w ganjmandi, District Kota for the offences tions 420, 406 of Indian Penal Code, 18

¶9

It has been con unsel for the petitioner ".. that FIR is highly belated~~he.pallegdiy~qvenant rgii---=-- C &*-23> is stated to have %~c 4-6-u a taken place on 17.03.2016 whereas the FIR has been lodged in 2018 and contents of the FIR does indicate that civil transaction has taken place and in event if conditions of the covenant have not been adhered to then complainant has got right to agitate the cause before the competent civil court but a false FIR has been lodged, petitioner is innocent, challan has already been filed, petitioner is prepared to face the trial, so he be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and has contended that the amount obtained has not been returned by the accused to the complainant and complainant does not deserve to be ousted on bail.

¶11

Heard and perused the material on record.

¶12

Contents of the FIR does reveal that said transaction pertains to purchase of a land belongs to 17.03.2016 and the impugned FIR has been 4' FIR that the not been consig na' <J ++@ 4 A Considering the aforesaid, without commenting on-the merits of the case, it appe

¶13

Accordingly, n bail subject to furnishing of pers y bond(s) to the satisfaction of learned t

¶14

LCHANDAN1)V. J.

¶15

Sanjay Kumawat-4

Dheeraj Wadiya S/O Surajmal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dheeraj Wadiya S/O Surajmal 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

Aasim Khan S/O Abdulla Khan B/C Musalman Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagirath S/O Ramgopal by Caste Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Kumar Meena S/O Shri Ramkaran Meena B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Omprakash S/O Ramprasad Vs State of Rajasthan

M.D.Julfekar Ali S/O Tahajuhsan, B/C Musalman Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul S/O Shri Mahavir Prasad Arya B/C Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan