Dismissed

Sandeep Choudhary S/O Sanwal Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 May 2022CRLMB/2981/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. connected to FIR No. 47/2021, the High Court dismissed the petition. The court noted the petitioner's criminal antecedents, including pending serious offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, and held it not proper to grant bail without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application was dismissed.

Sandeep Choudhary S/O Sanwal Choudhary Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2981/2022

¶3

Sandeep Choudhary S/o Sanwal Choudhary, R/o Bibipur Chhota Tehsil Fatehpur Distt. Sikar Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripu Daman Singh Naruka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶10

Order

¶11

04/05/2022

¶12

This anticipatory bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 47/2021 registered at Police Station Fatehpur Sadar, District Sikar for the offences under Sections 420, 468 & 471 of IPC and Section 3/12 of Passport Act.

¶13

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are totally false. The petitioner has not prepared any second passport on the basis of forged documents. The petitioner has only one passport in his name. In compliance of order of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 24.03.2022 passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2819/2022, the petitioner has join the investigation. As per rejection bail order, the petitioner has criminal antecedents of six cases, out of which, he has been acquitted in few cases and

¶14

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-2981/2022]

¶15

in remaining cases, he is on bail. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner may be granted.

¶16

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed

¶17

the bail application.

¶18

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

¶19

The petitioner is named in the FIR. As per factual report, the petitioner has criminal antecedents of six cases, out of which, one case relates to the offence under Section 302 of IPC and another relates to the offence under Section 307 of IPC and both are pending.

¶20

Therefore, looking to the facts & circumstances of the case and gravity of the 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.

¶21

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

¶22

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶23

PAYAL/69

Sandeep Choudhary S/O Sanwal Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Choudhary S/O Sanwal Choudhary 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

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

Satyaprakash S/O Shri Purshottam Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamlesh S/O Prahlad Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Son of Ramniwas Vs State of Rajasthan