Allowed

Tarun Mali v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Feb 2022CRLMB/66/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bail order grants bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. considering his father's illness, lack of pending investigation against him, and delay in trial, directing release on personal and surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000 each (one local) with a stipulation to appear before the trial court.

Tarun Mali Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 66/2022

¶3

Tarun Mali S/o Likhmaram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Chaudhariya Ka Vas, Pratap Bazar, Rani Currently New Lucky Collection Mahtma Phule Chowk, Chakan, P.S. Chakan, Dist. Khed, Maharastra. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail, Pali).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Manvendra Bhati through VC
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. A.R. Choudhary, PP assisted by Mr. Ravindra Khichi

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

¶10

Order

¶11

03/02/2022

¶12

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, as per guidelines, lawyers have been advised to refrain from coming to the Courts, therefore, hearing of the matter is being taken up only through video conferencing.

¶13

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.290/2021, Police Station Marwar Junction, District Pali, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 384 & 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the I.T. Act.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing and learned Public Prosecutor, present-in-person. Perused the material available on record.

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLMB-66/2022]

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that one agreement in regard to sale of a property has been exhibited between Pushpa Devi, mother of the complainant and Lakhma Ram, father of the petitioner; amount of sale consideration is Rs. 22,00,000/- and Rs. 12,00,000/- have been paid at the time of execution of agreement and remaining amount has to be paid before 31.12.2019 but, the same has not been paid by complainant side; petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case; mobile number mentioned in the FIR belongs to co-accused Deepak and not to the petitioner; petitioner is behind the bars since 17.12.2021; father of the petitioner is suffering from cancer disease; no investigation or recovery is pending against the petitioner; and trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner and stated that some objectionable photographs of the complainant have allegedly been uploaded on Instagram by the accused-petitioner which has defamed the complainant victim ‘P’.

¶19

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the Hindi translation copy of the agreement of sale executed between the parties which is filed by learned counsel for the petitioner; illness of the father of the accusedpetitioner; accused-petitioner is behind the bars since 17.12.2021; no investigation or recovery is pending against the accused-petitioner; and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits

¶20

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-66/2022]

¶21

of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

¶22

Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the petitioner, Tarun Mali S/o Likhmaram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.290/2021, Police Station Marwar Junction, District Pali, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each (one surety shall be a local) to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶23

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

¶24

36-Rashi/-

Tarun Mali v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Mali 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

Dungar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pinta Ram @ Pintu Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhupendra @ Bhupsa Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijaypal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh Chandra Vs State

Mukesh Kumar Vs State