Dismissed

Rampratap Yadav S/O Matadeen Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Mar 2024CRLBC/5/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a bail cancellation application filed by a petitioner against a bail order granted to a non-petitioner co-accused in a cheating and forgery case. The court found no illegality or jurisdictional error in the trial court's decision to grant bail since the bail was based on the nature of the property dispute.

What did the court decide?

Bail Cancellation Application is dismissed.

Rampratap Yadav S/O Matadeen Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:13323]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No. 5/2024

¶4

Rampratap Yadav S/o Matadeen Yadav, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Katori Wala Tibara, Police Station Sadar, District Alwar.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Narendra Yadav S/o Ramesh Chand, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Tibara, Raisees, Katoriwala, Alwar.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sumer Singh Ola For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP Mr. Snjay Yadav

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

¶12

18/03/2024

¶13

Petitioner has filed this bail cancellation application, challenging the order dated 05.01.2024 passed by the Sessions Judge, Alwar, releasing the non-petitioner No.2-accused-Narendra Yadav on bail under Section 439 CrPC in connection with FIR No.671/2022 registered at Police Station Sadar Alwar, District Alwar for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC.

¶14

Heard counsel for petitioner, counsel for non-petitioner No.2accused and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record.

¶15

The contention of counsel for petitioner is that the Sessions Judge has released the non-petitioner No.2-accused on bail under Section 439 CrPC, only after suffering from custody of 5 days, whereas the punishment provided for alleged offences is up to 10 years. He submits that there is serious allegation against the petitioner to be involved in getting the mutation of the agricultural land in his name, that too by hiding the stay order on which note was already available in the revenue record, but that relevant page was teared with the connivance of revenue officials. Hence, he submits

[2024:RJ-JP:13323]

[CRLBC-5/2024]

(2 of 2)

that the trial order be cancelled and non-petitioner No.2-accused be sent to jail.

¶20

Per contra, counsel for non-petitioner No.2-accused pointed out that the Sessions Judge granted the bail considering the entire factual matrix of the case where the mutation in the name of nonpetitioner No.2-accused was sanctioned by the revenue authorities on the basis of registered sale deed dated 18.03.2017. Through this registered sale deed, non-petitioner No.2-accused has purchased the share of sons and daughters of deceased Arjun. He submits that the dispute between parties pertains to property rights and to continue the non-petitioner No.2-accused in custody was not warranted, hence the order to release the non-petitioner No.2-accused does not warrant interference.

¶21

Having heard counsel for both parties, this Court finds that the petitioner is not seeking cancellation of bail granted in favour of nonpetitioner No.2-accused on account of any supervening circumstances or misusing the liberty of bail, but the bail order itself has been challenged being passed illegally. This Court finds that the Sessions Court has extended heed over the nature of dispute between parties and thereafter has released the non-petitioner No.2 on bail under Section 439 CrPC in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction.

¶22

This Court does not find any illegality in the order impugned dated 05.01.2024 and there is no error of jurisdiction on the part of the Sessions Court in allowing the bail application.

¶23

Accordingly, the Bail Cancellation Application, is hereby dismissed.

¶24

(SUDESH BANSAL), J

¶25

RONAK/12

Rampratap Yadav S/O Matadeen Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rampratap Yadav S/O Matadeen Yadav 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

Girraj S/O Harpal Gurjar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Abhishek Sharma S/O Manoj Sharma, Vs Rakesh Khandelwal S/O Raghunandan Khandelwal

Ram Chandra Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Aamir Khan Son of Jakir Alias Bhurra Vs State of Rajsthan

Sudheer Kumar Advocate S/O Ilam Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Satyendra Singh @ Satya S/O Shri Mahendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan