Dismissed

Neha Jain D/O Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Aug 2022CRLMB/4274/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. involving charges of cheating and forgery, the High Court dismissed the plea, holding that the gravity of the offence and the nature of allegations made the petitioner unfit for bail.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was dismissed; the petitioner was not enlarged on bail.

Neha Jain D/O Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain Vs the State… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4274/2022 Neha Jain D/o Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain, Aged About 25 Years, R/o B-42, Shiv Nagar, Janta Colony, P.s. Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur.

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor

¶6

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar, PP

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

¶8

Order

¶9

04/08/2022

¶10

The present bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.1140/2019 registered at Police Station Jawahar Circle, Jaipur City (East) for the offence(s) under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner was only employee in the office of accused Ramlakhan Dessaniya. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. So, the petitioner be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶12

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that petitioner and other co-accused had taken crores of rupees of several persons by promising to refund the said amount with huge profit but they had not returned money to the complainant. She

¶13

(2 of 2)

¶14

[CRLMB-4274/2022]

¶15

had cheated several persons with connivance of co-accused. So, looking to the gravity of offence, anticipatory bail be dismissed.

¶16

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

¶17

counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

¶18

Allegation against the petitioner is that petitioner and other co-accused had assisted several persons for taking loan from bank and took loan amounts from the persons by giving assurance of huge profit. Petitioner had cheated several persons. So, looking to the gravity of offence, I do not consider it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Hence, the anticipatory bail application stands dismissed.

¶20

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶21

Jatin /106

Neha Jain D/O Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neha Jain D/O Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain 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

Satya Narain Vs State

Naresh Kumar Meena S/O Shri Kishanlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Hamid Hussain Son of Shri Ismail Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonveer Son of Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashok Meena Son of Shri Narsi Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Pankaj Sharma Son of Shri Omkar Nath Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan