Rajasthan HC Bench at Jaipur dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding corruption charges related to issuance of deficit pattas, citing the gravity of the offence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3338/2020
Surendra Kumar Chetiwal S/o Shri Mahendra Kumar Khateek, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No 6 Surajgarh Dist. Jhunujhunu Presently Chairman Nagar Palika Surajgarh Dist. Jhunjhunu Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Upman (through video conference), Mr. Babu Lal Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP., Mr. Mahendra Sharma, Mr. Anand Swami, Addl. SP, A.C.B., Churu.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Order
Order reserved on : 10/09/2020 Date of Pronouncement :15/09/2020
(2 of 3)
[CRLMB-3338/2020]
submits that in the audit, there is no allegation regarding deficit amount. Petitioner has bonafidely acted on the report of the clerk. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that chargesheet has been filed against the petitioner and no need to send the petitioner in custody because no recovery is to be done from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit the deficit amount, so, the petitioner be enlarged on bail.
(3 of 3)
[CRLMB-3338/2020]
gravity of offence, I am not inclined to allow the anticipatory bail application.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Seema/10
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of issuing pattas at a deficit amount.
Whether the gravity of the offence justifies rejection of the bail application.
Whether delay in FIR filing and false implication negate the need for anticipatory bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.Relied on¶3
Dataram Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. in Criminal Appeal No.227/2018
Yogendra Singh Meena Vs. State of RajasthanRelied on¶3
Yogendra Singh Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No.2277/2018)
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Surendra Kumar Chetiwal
State Of Rajasthan
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
