Allowed

Mohd. Khalid S/O Late Shri Mohd. Abid v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Mar 2024CRLMB/263/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Rajasthan granted bail to the petitioner, Mohd. Khalid, accused of cheating and forgery under various sections of the IPC. The court ordered his release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000 each.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner, Mohd. Khalid, is released on bail after furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each, with stipulation to appear before the trial court.

Mohd. Khalid S/O Late Shri Mohd. Abid Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 263/2024

¶3

Mohd. Khalid son of late Shri Mohd. Abid, aged about 42 Years, resident of House No. 109, Sudamapuri Nahri Ka Naka Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jaipur. At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, through the PP

¶7

..Non Petitioner

¶8

Umesh Jain son of late Shri Samran Lal, resident of Virasat Jammudeep Building, Plot No. 318, Flat No. 103, Siddharth Nagar, Police Station Jawahar Circle, Jaipur.

¶9

----Non Petitioner-Complainant

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Harendra Singh with
	Mr. Shivam Sharma and
	Dr. Rudranshu Singh
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Prashant Sharma-PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

04/03/2024

¶14

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by petitioner in connection with FIR No.167/2023 registered at Police Station Vidhayakpuri, District Jaipur City (South), wherein he is charged for offence(s) punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code (later on, he is charged for offence(s) punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of Indian Penal Code).

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that he transferred a sum of Rs.85 lacs from the account of one Ms. Kirti Jain to his account. Counsel submits that after investigation, the police found that in all a loss of Rs. 2.51 lacs has been incurred by the account-holder and rest of

¶16

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-263/2024]

¶17

the amount is lying intact in the account of the account-holder. Counsel submits that two cases of similar nature were lodged against the petitioner and in FIR No.156/2023 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Jaipur against the petitioner, indulgence of the bail has already been grated by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.11.2023. Counsel submits that after investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed and the trial will take its own time to conclude, and the alleged offence is triable by Magistrate, therefore, indulgence of bail be granted to the petitioner.

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶19

Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that indulgence of bail has already been granted to the petitioner in the similar case bearing FIR No. 186/2023 and looking to the fact that the alleged offence is triable by Magistrate and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take its own time to conclude and without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner Mohd. Khalid son of late Shri Mohd. Abid arrested in connection with aforementioned FIR, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CRLMB-263/2024]

¶23

stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and

¶24

as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

( ANOOP KUMAR DHAND ),J

¶26

Aayush Sharma/49

Mohd. Khalid S/O Late Shri Mohd. Abid v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Khalid S/O Late Shri Mohd. Abid 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

Ranvindarsingh S/O Shri Jarnelsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Laxminarain S/O Shri Balu Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Sharma S/O Shri Ram Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Jorawar Singh Malawat S/O Kamlesh Malawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishankant S/O Banshilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kulwant Singh @ Teetu S/O Ramchandra Vs State of Rajasthan