Mahipal Choudhary S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 1037 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 1 February, 2021

Rajasthan High Court
Mahipal Choudhary S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 1 February, 2021
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
                                15555/2020
Mahipal Choudhary S/o Shri Rugharam, Aged About 27 Years,
R/o Vill. Ramliyavas Tehsil Merta City Dist. Nagour (At Present In
Central Jail Ajmer)
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                  ----Respondent

Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15650/2020 Ranjeet Singh S/o Late Sh. Babulal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Civil Lines Teachers Colony Bareli (U.p.) Presently Private Security/clerk Vice Chancellor Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati University Ajmer (Presently Confined At Central Jail Ajmer)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brahma Nand Sandu present in the Court Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur present in the Court For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vibhuti Bhushan Sharma, AAG with Mr. Harshal Tholia present in the Court HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Judgment / Order 01/02/2021

1. Petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.195/2020 was registered at Police Station ACB (Downloaded on 03/02/2021 at 10:03:34 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15555/2020] Jaipur (ACB SU Ajmer) (Raj.) for offence under Sections 7, 7A and 8 of P.C.A. Act and Section 120-B of I.P.C.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that the allegation against petitioner-Mahipal is of paying bribe amount of Rs.2,20,000/-, which was recovered from the co-accused-Rampal Jat, who was the Vice Chancellor. It is also contended that the amount was given to the Vice Chancellor through petitioner-Ranjeet Singh. It is further contended that the Vice Chancellor has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

4. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on "Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI" (2012) 1 SCC 40.

5. Learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently opposed the bail application. It is contended that Government is moving to the Supreme Court for cancelling of bail of co-accused- Rampal Jat. It is also contended that the amount was taken from as many as seventy colleges and the amount would go to the tune of more than Rs.5 crore. However, it is admitted that except the bribe amount of this case, no recovery has been effected from the petitioner or Vice Chancellor.

6. Additional Advocate General has placed reliance on "Kavi Arora vs. State" in Bail Application No.1413/2020 decided by the High Court of Delhi on 23.07.2020; "Ramesh Chand Goel Vs CBI" in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46367/2015 decided by Allahabad High Court on 28.03.2016 and "Junaid Khan Vs Central Bureau of Investigation" in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2524/2019 decided by Uttrakhand High Court on 18.09.2020. It is argued that even after the judgment of "Sanjay (Downloaded on 03/02/2021 at 10:03:34 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15555/2020] Chandra vs CBI"(supra), Court has dismissed bail applications in appropriate cases.

7. I have considered the contentions.

8. As far as the present case is concerned, the allegation is against petitioner-Mahipal of giving bribe amount of Rs.2,20,000/- to the Vice Chancellor through petitioner-Ranjeet Singh and the said amount has been recovered. Petitioners are in custody since September, 2020. The co-accused, who is the principal accused and the Vice Chancellor and from whose office the said amount was recovered, has been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this court.

9. In view of the judgment of "Sanjay Chandra vs CBI"(supra) and also the fact that co-accused has been enlarged on bail, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.

10. These bail applications are, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

11. A copy of this order be placed in connected file.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J ARTI SHARMA /45-46 (Downloaded on 03/02/2021 at 10:03:34 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)