Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shishir vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27227) on 16 June, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:27227]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8821/2023
Shishir S/o Pramshankar, Aged About 25 Years, R/o New
Mahaveer Nagar Girwa, Police Govardhan Vilas, Dist. Udaipur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : Mr. CS Ojha, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order 16/06/2025
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNSS at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case
1. FIR Number 48/2023
2. Concerned Police Station Saagwada
3. District Dungarpur
4. Offences alleged in the FIR Under Sections 420, 406, 34
of IPC
5. Offences added, if any Under Section 120-B of IPC
6. Date of passing of 26.05.2023
impugned order
2. Having apprehension of being arrested in the afore-
mentioned matter, the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail on the ground that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no (Downloaded on 17/06/2025 at 09:32:48 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:27227] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-8821/2023] factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.
4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the present case is not fit for grant of anticipatory bail.
5. None present for the petitioner.
I have heard learned counsel for the State and gone through the order under challenge, the FIR and other material. It is revealing that the complainant has been duped by Mukesh, the manager of Eli Global Nidhi Mutual and Micro Finance Navrangpura Ahamdabad to Saagwada Branch, Dungarpur and cashier Rajnish Sompura and Rajendra who were working between year 2016- 2021. Some of these invested their money in a hope of getting it doubled after some time. Prima facie, material is their to show that the petitioner was not a director of the alleged company in which the amount was deposited by the investors. There is no allegation that anything was given to this petitioner directly by the complainant or any of the witnesses. The offences involved in case are triable by a Court of Magistrate, for which the provisions contained under Section 41 and 41A of the CrPC are applicable mutatis mutandis and the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [AIR 2014 SC 2756] applies squarely in the present case, where custodial investigation would not be required.
6. An interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner on (Downloaded on 17/06/2025 at 09:32:48 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:27227] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-8821/2023] 01.08.2023 restraining his arrest in the present case, whereafter around two years have lapsed and the petitioner is enjoying the said protection since then and he has not misused the liberty during this prolonged period as no report in this regard has been received by this court. Thus, in light of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhishek Kumar Vs. State of Dehli (Criminal Appeal No.360/2022) reported in 2022/INSC/275, and considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present matter. Needless to say, none of the observations made herein under shall affect the rights of either of the parties during trial and this Court refrains from commenting on the niceties of the matter.
7. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with the FIR, details of which have been given in tabular form above, 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:-
(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 (Downloaded on 17/06/2025 at 09:32:48 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:27227] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-8821/2023]
(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.
(FARJAND ALI),J 179-Chhavi/-
(Downloaded on 17/06/2025 at 09:32:48 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)