Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Suresh Khandelwal S/O Shri Ramjilal ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 January, 2021

Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16061/2019

Suresh Khandelwal S/o Shri Ramjilal Khandelwal Aged About 54
Years, R/o Plot No. B-4, Saket Colony, Janta Colony, Jaipur
(Rajasthan)
                                                         ----Petitioner/Accused
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Subhash Chand Khandelwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Ganesh Saini, PP
For Complainant(s)        :     Mr. Kapil Gupta, Adv.



      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

                                     Order

27/01/2021

1.     The present bail application has been filed under Section 438

Cr. P.C. in connection with FIR No.681/2019 registered at Police

Station Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur for the offence under Sections 420,

406, 474 and 477-A of IPC.

2.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case. As per FIR, present case

is of purely civil nature and criminal colour has been given by the

complainant. Complainant may file a recovery suit against the

petitioner. So, the petitioner be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

3.     Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the

complainant have opposed the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for complainant/respondent submits that the petitioner had taken Rs.10,00,000/-(Ten Lacs) from the (Downloaded on 28/01/2021 at 11:02:03 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-16061/2019] complainant and he had given outdated cheque to the complainant. The said cheque was dishonoured. After that, petitioner did not pay the said amount. So, looking to the gravity of offence, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.

5. Allegation levelled against the petitioner is that the petitioner had taken Rs.10,00,000/-(Ten Lacs) from the complainant. He had given outdated cheque of SBBJ Bank, Jaipur to the complainant. Petitioner very well knew that SBBJ Bank, Jaipur has been merged into State Bank Of India. The said cheque was not honoured. After that, petitioner did not pay the said amount.

6. On account of gravity of offence, I am not inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

7. Hence, the criminal misc. bail application stands dismissed.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Gourav/05 (Downloaded on 28/01/2021 at 11:02:03 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)