Anil vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 20 February, 2018

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Anil vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 20 February, 2018

Bench: Pankaj Bhandari

 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
                      JAIPUR
         S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 1604 / 2018
Anil S/o Shri Nathu Ram B/c Aheer, R/o Langadwas Thana
Kishangarhbas Distt. Alwar (raj.)
                                                         ----Petitioner
                               Versus
State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
                                                       ----Respondent

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, P.P. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 20/02/2018

1. Petitioner has filed this miscellaneous bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No. 300/16 was registered at Police Thana Kishangarhbas (Alwar) for offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is bonafide purchaser. He was not aware that someone impersonated himself as Dalip Singh who has expired earlier while executing the sale deed.

4. It is also contended that sale deed stands cancelled by the Revenue Court.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

6. I have considered the contentions.

7. Considering the arguments put forth by counsel for the petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the anticipatory bail (2 of 2) [CRLMB-1604/2018] application.

8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Thana Kishangarhbas (Alwar) in F.I.R. No. 300/16 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner 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 his satisfaction on the following conditions :-

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

(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

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

(PANKAJ BHANDARI), J.

Amit/52

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur