Allowed

Damodar Prasad Sharma S/O Shri Chhitarmal Sharma v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 May 2021CRLMB/3688/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the petitioner challenged his detention in a cheating and forgery case. The High Court acknowledged contentions regarding transaction impossibilities post-demonetization and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The accused petitioner is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Damodar Prasad Sharma S/O Shri Chhitarmal Sharma Vs the… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3688/2021

¶3

Damodar Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Chhitarmal Sharma, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 27, Govardhan Nagar, Toll Tax Sanganer, Thana Malpura Gate, Jaipur (Raj). (That The Accused Petitioner Is In Jail At Jaipur)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶7

	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Harendra Singh, through VC
For State	: Mr. Sher Singh Mahala, PP
For Complainant(s)	: Mr. Prahlad Sharma, through VC

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶9

Judgment / Order

¶10

05/05/2021

¶11

Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶12

F.I.R. No.1178/2019 was registered at Police Station Pratap Nagar for offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 384 and 471 of I.P.C.

¶13

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that as per the

¶14

FIR, the alleged agreement took place in November, 2020 and Rs.16 lac was paid in cash. It is also contended that after demonetization, payment in cash to the tune of Rs.16 lac, is not possible. It is also contended that if the property is transferred and it is more than Rs. 20,000/-, the same has to be paid by bank transfer and no cash above Rs.20,000/- could be given. It is further contended that there is an inordinate delay in lodging of

(2 of 2)

[CRLMB-3688/2021]

the FIR.

Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application. It is contended that petitioner has received Rs. 16 lac in cash and if there was any rider by Reserve Bank of India, petitioner is also responsible for taking cash money.

¶19

I have considered the contentions.

¶20

Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶21

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to

¶22

do so that.

¶23

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶24

AARZOO ARORA /34

Damodar Prasad Sharma S/O Shri Chhitarmal Sharma v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Damodar Prasad Sharma S/O Shri Chhitarmal Sharma v. the 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

Shrawan Kumar Devanda S/O Seduram Devanda Vs State of Rajasthan

Chandra Prakash Mahawar @ Golu Son of Shri Latoor Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu S/O Gopi Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashok Kumar Meena S/O Shri Jankilal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Shankarlal S/O Rameshwarlal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ravi Kumar Meena S/O Hansraj Vs the State of Rajasthan