Dismissed

Mukesh Modi S/O Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Aug 2025CRLMB/5667/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS by an accused charged with cheating and breach of trust over a flat booking payment dispute, with 218 criminal cases registered against him. Bail was denied given the criminal antecedents; the Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial.

What did the court decide?

No bail granted; Trial Court directed to expedite the trial.

Mukesh Modi S/O Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:32024]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5667/2025

¶4

Mukesh Modi S/o Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi, Resident Of Adarsh Nagar, Police Station Kotwali, Sirohi, Rajasthan. (Date Of Arrest 14.07.2024) (Presently On Interim Bail Granted By The Rajasthan High Court, Jodhour, On Medical Grounds)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Kabra with Mr. Kunal Agrawal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶11

Order

¶12

13/08/2025

¶13

Instant application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the applicant-accused Mukesh Modi S/o Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi in FIR No.539/2021 dated 01.12.2021 registered at P.S. Bhankrota District – Jaipur (West), whereby the applicant-accused was charged under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC.

¶14

The applicant Mukesh Modi S/o Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi was arrested on 13.07.2024 and has in judicial custody since then. The Court below has dismissed the bail application.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant relying upon grounds raised in bail application submits that the applicant is innocent person and falsely implicated in the present case.

[2025:RJ-JP:32024]

[CRLMB-5667/2025]

(2 of 3)

He further submitted that in the instant case, not a single legal evidence is available against present applicant-accused to charge him under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. He further submitted that the dispute is of a civil nature and no case of cheating and breach of trust, is made out. He further referred the period of custody and submitted that till date, the trial has not been concluded, so the applicant-accuse is entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submitted that this applicant is a wellknown professional economic offender and there are 218 criminal cases registered against applicant-accused. He referred the impugned order and submitted that 113 cases of similar nature were registered against applicant-accused and same are pending before the Trial Courts.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the entire material.

¶22

In a matter arising out of FIR No.539/2021 registered by complainant Priyanka Maan, this applicant-accused is arrested on 13.07.2024, the allegations suggest that complainant has booked the flat and paid advance deposit of ₹13,61,693/- at the time of booking and till date she made payment of ₹41,10,237/-, and the complainant is waiting for last several years for delivery of possession of flat. Initially, the matter is closed after considering the dispute as civil nature, but later, same is re-opened and after taking applicant-accused on production warrant in the instant case, interrogation was conducted and applicant-accuses is

[2025:RJ-JP:32024]

[CRLMB-5667/2025]

(3 of 3)

arrested on 13.07.2024. Afterwards, a charge-sheet has been filed.

¶27

There are more than 218 criminal cases against applicantaccused and the Trial Court has referred list of 113 cases registered against this applicant-accused.

¶28

The applicant-accused is in custody for around more than 1 year and as per learned counsel for applicant, the trial has not concluded. We have considered the provisions as referred by learned counsel for applicant, but there are number of criminal cases against applicant-accused and in such eventuality, it is not possible to conclude trial in all cases, but still taking note of delay in trial, it is appropriate to direct the Trial Court to expedite the trial. No case of bail is made out looking to criminal antecedents against present applicant-accused.

¶29

In view of discussion made herein above, the instant bail application preferred by applicant-accused Mukesh Modi S/o Late Sh. Prakash Raj Modi under Section 483 of BNSS, is hereby dismissed.

¶30

However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude as early as possible.

¶31

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶32

GAURAV /23

Mukesh Modi S/O Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Modi S/O Late Sh Prakash Raj Modi 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

Rajkishore Meena @ Raju Meena S/O Late Shri Lalluram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

David S/O Dharasingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Riyazudeen S/O Mehrajudeen Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Chand Sharma S/O Laduram Vs State of Rajasthan

Amar Singh @ Lalaram S/O Shri Hariram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Peyush Bhardwaj S/O Ramesh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan