Allowed

Saurabh Tayal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Aug 2021CRLMB/3066/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a money dispute case involving Sections 406, 420, 384 and 120-B IPC, noting the petitioner had paid the due amount and the complainant had no objection.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to conditions.

Saurabh Tayal Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2^nd Bail Application No. 3066/2021

¶3

Saurabh Tayal S/o Sh. Pravin Tayal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 6Th Floor, Pankaj Mahal, Opp. K.C. College Churchgate- 400 020 Mumbai Maharashtra.

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan

		----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. C.S. Kotwani Mr. Samarpit Gupta
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Mohd. Javed Gauri, P.P. Mr. Sudhir Saruparia for complainant

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶9

Order

¶10

17/08/2021

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶12

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with FIR No.129/2019 of Police Station Pratap Nagar, District – Bhilwara for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 384 and 120-B. He has preferred this second anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the dispute between petitioner and the complainant is regarding payment of money and the petitioner has paid around forty five lakh rupees to the complainant up to 04.11.2020. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that as per the

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CRLMB-3066/2021]

¶16

complainant, the petitioner has also handed over a demand draft of Rs.10 lakhs executed in favour of the complainant.

¶17

Learned counsel Mr. Sudhir Saruparia appearing for the complainant has admitted that the complainant has already handed over a demand draft of Rs.10 lakhs executed in favour of the complainant. It is also submitted that the complainant has no objection if the benefit of anticipatory bail is gratned to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the complainant have also informed that they are going to file appropriate proceedings for the purpose of quashing of the FIR as well.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties; taking into consideration the fact that the dispute between the parties is with regard to payment of money, however, now when the petitioner has already made payment of all the due amounts to the complainant, to which, he is also agreed, 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.

¶20

Accordingly, this 2^nd bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner - Saurabh Tayal S/o Sh. Pravin Tayal in connection with FIR No.129/2019 of Police Station Pratap Nagar, District – Bhilwara, he shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./S.H.O. on the following conditions:-

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CRLMB-3066/2021]

¶23

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

¶24

(ii) He 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;

¶25

(iii) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.

¶26

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶27

121-Ravi Kh/-

Saurabh Tayal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Tayal 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

Dr. Radha Krishnan Institute of Animal Sciences Vs State of Rajasthan

Bal Bharti Institute of Animal Science Vs State of Rajasthan

Adarsh Institute of Animal Sciences Merta City Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar Vs Vinod Kumar Wadhwa

Bhan Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

R.R. Nursing Institute Vs State of Rajasthan