Allowed

Prahlad S/O Gopallal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Apr 2021CRLMB/4550/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused arrested for cheating and forgery related to a sale agreement dispute. After hearing submissions and considering the nature of allegations and completion of investigation, the Court granted bail on personal bond.

What did the court decide?

The accused-petitioner shall be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each.

Prahlad S/O Gopallal Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4550/2021

¶3

Prahlad S/o Gopallal, R/o Ghode Wale Baba Kachchi Basti Near Mataji Ka Mandir P.S. Jawahar Nagar Kota Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota)

¶4

----Accused/Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. F.R. Meena, PP Mr. Nitin Jain

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

¶9

Order

¶10

07/04/2021

¶11

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.365/2020 registered at Police Station Nayapura, District Kota City for the offence(s) under Section(s) 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of I.P.C. and later on for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of I.P.C.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he has falsely been implicated in this case purely of civil nature. He submitted that as a matter of fact, the erstwhile khatedar of the land in question Mr. Sunil Prabhakar has executed an agreement to sell dated 19.06.2015 also of the land in question in his favour and other persons alongwith the power of attorney in his favour wherein it was endorsed that the petitioner would be authorized to do and execute all the work/act for which the principal was

¶13

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-4550/2021]

¶14

competent. Learned counsel submitted that under the sale agreement dated 22.03.2016, the complainant/purchaser was under an obligation to pay the entire sale consideration within 20 months before execution of the registered sale deed; but, on his failure to abide by this term, after waiting for a reasonable period, he executed another agreement dated 06.08.2019 in favour of third person. He submitted that the erstwhile khatedar Mr. Sunil Prabhakar has also lodged an FIR No.0078/2020 dated 05.02.2020 at Police Station Nayapura, Kota City against him wherein the Investigating Agency after thorough investigation found that the petitioner was competent to execute sale deed on behest of the complainant therein, i.e., Mr. Sunil Prabhakar and he has committed no offence. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2021, investigation as against him is complete, the offences are triable by Magistrate, he has no criminal antecedents and prayed for his release on bail.

¶15

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the petitioner has executed an agreement to sell in favour of the complainant without authority, taken part sale consideration for Rs.80 lacs and looking to the gravity of allegation against him, he does not deserve indulgence of bail.

¶16

Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

¶17

Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by learned counsels for the respective parties, the nature of allegations against the petitioner, the investigation conducted by the Investigating Agency in FIR No.0078/2020, the material

¶18

(3 of 3)

¶19

[CRLMB-4550/2021]

¶20

contained in the case diary, the terms of the agreement dated 22.03.2016, the offences being triable by Magistrate and absence of criminal antecedents; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Prahlad S/o Gopallal shall be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with aforementioned FIR registered at concerned Police Station, 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 trial Court with the stipulation that he shall comply with all the conditions laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

¶22

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

¶23

PRAGATI/30

Prahlad S/O Gopallal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prahlad S/O Gopallal 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

Jiya Chand Sikalgar D/O Chand Sikalgar Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran S/O Iqbal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sagas Singh S/O Madan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gyarsilal Son of Shri Samlya Mogya Vs State of Rajasthan

Aarif S/O Badam Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar S/O Shiv Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan