Allowed

Satyaprakash S/O Shri Purshottam v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 May 2022CRLMB/1094/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner in connection with an FIR for cheating, criminal breach of trust, and criminal conspiracy. The court considered the amicable settlement between parties and the lack of criminal antecedents, granting bail subject to conditions regarding investigation cooperation and non-interference with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions: personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, availability for investigation, no travel abroad without permission, and no tampering with

Satyaprakash S/O Shri Purshottam Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1094/2022

¶3

Satyaprakash S/o Shri Purshottam, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Garh Colony Sabji Mandi Rajpura Ward Baran Distt. Baran

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Rohan Jain through video conferencing
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rajendra Yadav, GA-cum-AAG
For Complainant	: Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶9

Order

¶10

04/05/2022

¶11

This anticipatory bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 575/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Baran for the offences under Sections 420, 406 & 120-B of IPC.

¶12

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that as per rejection bail order, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Both the parties have settled their dispute amicably. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner may be granted.

¶13

Learned counsel for the complainant has no objection if the bail application of the petitioner is granted.

¶14

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMB-1094/2022]

¶17

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

¶18

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the complainant and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner-Satyaprakash S/o Shri Purshottam in the aforesaid FIR, the accused-petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of concerned SHO/IO on the following conditions:

¶20

i) That the petitioner will make himself available for the investigation as and when required by the investigation officer.

¶21

ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without permission of the Court.

¶22

iii) That the petitioner will not temper with the evidence or threaten or pressurize the witnesses in the case.

¶23

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶24

PAYAL/61

Satyaprakash S/O Shri Purshottam v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyaprakash S/O Shri Purshottam v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shriniwas S/O Ramswaroop Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash S/O Radheyshyam Vs State of Rajasthan

Aman Mriza @ Aman Mitha S/O Resama Mriza Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamlesh S/O Prahlad Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeep Choudhary S/O Sanwal Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Son of Ramniwas Vs State of Rajasthan