Allowed

Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/O Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Mar 2024CRLMB/382/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan allowed bail to the accused-petitioner in an FIR regarding cheating, forgery and fraud, observing that the main allegations are against co-accused who maintained the bank accounts and the trial may take considerable time.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in FIR No.351/2022 on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/O Shri Shankarlal Tataya… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

(1 of 3) [CRLMB-382/2024]

¶2

[2024:RJ-JP:13763]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 382/2024

¶5

Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/o Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Mahanideshak Sahakarita Mishan, Address Nhq Icom Plot Number 110, Pocket 27, Sector 24, Rohini, New Delhi, At Present Resident Of C-201, Amit Bloom Field, Ambe Gawn, Near Nawle Brij, Pune, Police Station Bharti Vidhyapeeth Katraj, District Pune, Maharashtra. (At Present Confined At Central Jail, Jaipur).

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Manish Kumar
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. C. G. Chopra-PP
		Mr. Krishna Chander
		Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶12

Order

¶13

19/03/2024

¶14

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/o Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.351/2022 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur West for the offence(s) under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC.

¶15

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The main allegation of hatching conspiracy, creating forged company and extorting money from various persons by duping them are

[2024:RJ-JP:13763]

[CRLMB-382/2024]

(2 of 3)

against other co-accused Upendra Singh Rudradev, Gyan Prakash Patel, Lalan Kumar, Ranjan Kumar, Kajal Jha, Rajni Singh, Sokhi Lal Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that no amount was transferred into the bank account of petitioner. The entire amount obtained from various complainants was deposited in the account maintained by co-accused Upendra Singh Rudradev and the allegation of forging call letters etc., is also against the coaccused Upendra Singh Rudradev and other co-accused. He further submits that petitioner was also appointed by the company operated by co-accused Upendra Singh Rudradev on fixed payment. He submits that the other FIR is pending against the petitioner as mentioned in the impugned order dated 22.12.2023 are also related to the same incident whereby, several complainants have been filed alleging obtaining money after misrepresenting the fact and assuring the complainant to appoint them at various posts. The petitioner is in custody since 12.10.2023 and the trial/investigation of the case may take considerable time, therefore, bail application of the accusedpetitioner may be allowed.

¶20

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the bail application.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor produces the factual report. The same is taken on record.

¶22

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶23

The allegation of procuring money from various complainants by misrepresentation and assuring them to appoint in the company is against the other co-accused namely Upendra Singh

[2024:RJ-JP:13763]

[CRLMB-382/2024]

(3 of 3)

Rudradev and other co-accused. The entire amount obtained from various complainants was also deposited in the account maintained by the other co-accused. The other FIRs lodged against the petitioner are also related to the same act. Considering the above fact and taking into consideration that the matter is triable by Magistrate and petitioner is in custody since long, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/o Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil in connection with FIR No.351/2022 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur West shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶29

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶30

89-Rahul Joshi

Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/O Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Shankar Rao Patil S/O Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil 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

Jeetram S/O Lakshman Vs State of Rajasthan

Nareshchand S/O Mannalal Vs State of Rajasthan

Babulal Meena S/O Raghunath Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Kali Devi W/O Late Sh. Prabhu Sansi Vs State of Rajasthan

Naresh Kumar S/O Shri Ram Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Nemichand S/O Banwari Vs State of Rajasthan