Allowed

Ashok v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Jul 2024CRLMB/5719/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The present anticipatory bail application was allowed. The Court held that since the disputed loan amount was already deposited, with the only remaining allegation being the creation of a forged document, the case qualifies for bond bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each with conditions to remain available for interrogation and not to tamper with witnesses.

Ashok Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:28786]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5719/2024 Ashok S/o Omprakash, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Dhana Mohalla, Police Station Mathaniya, Distt Jodhpur Raj

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Yogita Mohnani
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Anda Ram Choudhary,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

¶10

Judgment

¶11

15/07/2024

¶12

This is an anticipatory bail moved on behalf of the applicant in relation to F.I.R. no 236/2023 of Police Station Mathaniya District Jodhpur, registered for the offence punishable under sections(s) 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC.

¶13

Learned counsel representing the petitioner vehemently urged that petitioner is innocent person and present FIR filed against the petitioner is false and baseless; that the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a false case; that there is no record to show as to how ingredient of Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC is made out against him besides other offences; that his custodial interrogation is not required; that there are no allegations of petitioner tampering with the evidence and nothing is to be recovered from applicant; that his antecedents are impeccable. Therefore, to protect his life and liberty an order of anticipatory bail may be passed in his favour.

¶14

From the other side, learned Public Prosecutor for the State has strongly objected the submissions made by learned counsel for the

[2024:RJ-JD:28786]

[CRLMB-5719/2024]

(2 of 3)

applicant and submitted that on the basis of material collected so far the investigation officer has reason to believe that petitioner is guilty of offences alleged; There are serious allegations against the applicant of making forged documents. Highlighting the non-cooperation in investigation by petitioner, learned PP has vehemently submitted that in the absence of custodial interrogation of petitioner, investigation in this case cannot be taken to its logical conclusion and in view of nature of gravity of offence, custodial interrogation of petitioner is essential. He thus, prayed that in the facts of the present case, it is expedient that anticipatory bail application be dismissed.

¶19

I have appreciated the submissions advanced by the learned defence counsel and learned Public Prosecutor and have carefully perused the material available on record.

¶20

On perusal of the record and upon consideration of the submissions, it would be clear that the loan amount taken by the petitioner has already been deposited in the bank concerned. The No Objection Certificate produced by the counsel for the petitioner is taken on record. Now the only allegation against the petitioner remains to be investigation is that he had created a forged document in his own favour to obtain the said loan.

¶21

As an upshot of the above discussion and having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr. P.C.

¶22

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Ashok S/o

[2024:RJ-JD:28786]

[CRLMB-5719/2024]

(3 of 3)

Omprakash in connection with the FIR No. 236/2023, Police Station Mathaniya, District Jodhpur, the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs. 25000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO on the following’ conditions:-

¶27

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶28

(ii) that the petitioner 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 any police officer;

¶29

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶30

(iv) That the petitioners shall abide by all the conditions specified under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.

¶31

The comments made hereinabove shall be considered restricted to this bail application only and will not prejudice the final outcome of the case. Disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶33

78-praveen/-

Ashok v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok 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

Rahul Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul Vs State of Rajasthan

Prem Vaswani Vs State of Rajasthan

Koushala Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Pratap Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan