Allowed

Smt. Vijay Kumari W/O Sh. Rakesh Raman v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 May 2023CRLMB/3755/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by a senior citizen in a cheating case involving a cancelled property sale agreement, observing the case involved a civil dispute.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; police bond of Rs. 50,000 and demand bonds of two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each directed.

Smt. Vijay Kumari W/O Sh. Rakesh Raman Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/009371]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3755/2023

¶4

Smt. Vijay Kumari W/o Sh. Rakesh Raman, R/o 40, Haribhauupadhyaya Nagar, Ajmer

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Anirudh Tyagi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Chandra Gupt Chopra, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶11

Order

¶12

04/05/2023

¶13

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.370/2022, registered at Police Station Christianganj, District Ajmer for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material available on record.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the this is a case involving civil dispute. Earlier an agreement was made by the complainant with the co-accused - Prince R Raman to sale the property. Learned counsel submits that the applicant did not comply with the conditions of the agreement for making payment of the sale amount, as per the agreement. The said agreement

[2023/RJJP/009371]

[CRLMB-3755/2023]

(2 of 3)

was cancelled vide letter dated 01.02.2022 and the FIR has been lodged after cancellation of the agreement.

¶20

Learned counsel submits that the co-accused - Prince R Raman, who is son of the present applicant, has been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B.Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2998/2023 (Prince R Raman Vs. State of Rajasthan) dated 14.03.2023.

¶21

Learned counsel submits that the applicant is a senior citizen and suffering from some psychiatrist problems and ill health and the medical documents thereof, are presented by the applicant.

¶22

Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant will be called in the investigation and will abide by all the terms and conditions imposed on her, therefore the accused-applicant be enlarged on bail.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the misc. bail application and submits that the property in dispute is in the name of the present applicant and the sale agreement was entered into by signatures of the applicant, therefore, the present misc. application could not be allowed.

¶24

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the view that case of the applicant is similar to the co-accused Prince R Raman, who has already been enlarged on bail, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant Smt.Vijay Kumari, W/o Sh. Rakesh Raman , in connection with

[2023/RJJP/009371]

[CRLMB-3755/2023]

(3 of 3)

FIR No.370/2022 registered at Police Station Christianganj, the applicant shall be released on bail; provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO on the following conditions:-

¶30

(1) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before a police officer as and when required;

¶31

(2) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; and

¶32

(3) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶33

Needless to mention that the above observations made by this Court are on the basis of material so far produced before the Court. They are only prima-facie observation and the same shall however, not come in the way of the trial Court to take independent view of the matter, based on ocular and oral evidence, while finally deciding the case.

¶34

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR), J

¶35

Monika/115

Smt. Vijay Kumari W/O Sh. Rakesh Raman v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vijay Kumari W/O Sh. Rakesh Raman 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

Kailash S/O Kalu Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Yogesh Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Hanuman Prasad Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Mosin S/O Mohammad Rafiq Vs State of Rajasthan

Irfan S/O Asar Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Babita W/O Late Rajendra Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishvendra S/O Amarchand Vs State of Rajasthan