Allowed

Aadesh Kumar S/O Shri Ghanshyam, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Feb 2025CRLMB/7372/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Aadesh Kumar regarding offences under Sections 341, 323, 365, 504 & 506 of IPC. The petition, contending false implication and active cooperation with investigation, was permitted with a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties. The court imposed conditions including availability for interrogation and not leaving India without pe

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner directed to be released on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each on specified conditions.

Aadesh Kumar S/O Shri Ghanshyam, Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:6273]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7372/2024

¶4

Aadesh Kumar S/o Shri Ghanshyam, Aged About 45 Years, R/o E-3, Gulmohar Garden, Village Bhatawala, Vatika Road, Sanganer, Jaipur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

12/02/2025

¶13

The instant pre-arrest bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.PC filed on behalf of the petitioner, who is having apprehension of arrest in F.I.R. No.415/2024 registered at Police Station Jawahar Circle, District Jaipur City (East) (Rajasthan) for offences under Sections 341, 323, 365, 504 & 506 of IPC.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate for which maximum sentence is seven years. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Counsel submits that in pursuance of order dated 09.07.2024, petitioner has already joined the investigation. Counsel submits that petitioner is on interim protection for last seven months and there is no allegation against him of misusing the liberty of interim

[2025:RJ-JP:6273]

[CRLMB-7372/2024]

(2 of 3)

protection. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. However, she fairly conceded the fact that petitioner has joined the investigation.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that petitioner has joined the investigation in terms of order dated 09.07.2024; there is no allegation against the petitioner to misuse the interim protection; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioner, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶22

The anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Jawahar Circle, District Jaipur City (East) (Rajasthan) in FIR No.415/2024 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner- Aadesh Kumar S/o Shri Ghanshyam, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶23

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

[2025:RJ-JP:6273]

[CRLMB-7372/2024]

(3 of 3)

(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, and

¶28

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

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J

¶30

LALIT MOHAN /233

Aadesh Kumar S/O Shri Ghanshyam, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aadesh Kumar S/O Shri Ghanshyam, 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

Kamal Kishore S/O Lalaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Manish Kumar S/O Kishor Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Manish Choudhary S/O Moolchand Vs State of Rajasthan

Veeru @ Birendra S/O Mukesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohit Swami S/O Shri Durgalal Swami Vs State of Rajasthan

Ratiram S/O Late Bhura, Vs State of Rajasthan