In this bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the petitioner's plea, holding that the gravity of the offence and the public prosecutor's submissions made it improper to grant bail without expressing an opinion on merits.
Anticipatory bail application dismissed.
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. 8733/2021
Hari Govind Singh Son of Shri Madho Singh, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Village Bankatwa, P.O. Pipiganj, P.S. Pipiganj, District Gorakpur (U.P)
----Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Aggarwal, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
28/07/2021
This anticipatory bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 406/2017 registered at Police Station Kotwali Tonk, District Tonk for the offences under Sections 420,406,467,468,471 and 120B of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was merely named as a Director and he has never worked as an active director of the company. The Hon'ble Apex Court has granted bail to the main accused Manoj Chand who happened to be a managing director of the company in SLP Criminal No. 1232/18 Manoj Chandra V/s State of U.P. vide order dated 22.7.2019. He further submits that in the year 2016, SEBI has initiated enquiry against the company and in that process, it has seized the entire assets of the company due to this, the company was unable to release payment and matter is still pending with
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-8733/2021]
SEBI. During the course of argument, learned counsel for petitioner submits the order dated 30.6.2015 of SEBIWTM/SR/SEBI-WRO:ILO/IMD/140/06/2015. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner may kindly be granted.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the bail application and further submits that as per factual report more than 15 cases in Rajasthan and overall more than 50 cases in India are registered against the petitioner. Therefore, looking to the gravity and circumstances of the case, bail application of the petitioner may kindly be dismissed.
Heard and perused the material available on record. Considering the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and gravity of offence but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it not proper to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J
PAYAL DHAWAN /1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in an FIR for cheque-related offences.
Whether the gravity of the offence and pending SEBI proceedings preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hari Govind Singh
The State Of Rajasthan
Chandra Kumar Songara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
