Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Bharat Lal @ Bharti S/O Raghunath vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 853 Raj/2

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 853 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 28 January, 2021

Rajasthan High Court
Bharat Lal @ Bharti S/O Raghunath vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 January, 2021
          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
                               15258/2020

Bharat Lal @ Bharti S/o Raghunath, R/o Barkhda Fauzdar, Police
Station Nagar, District Bharatpur (Accused In Custody At Central
Jail, Bharatpur )
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p
                                                                 ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Poonia For State : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

28/01/2021

1. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.325/2018 was registered at Police Station Bhusawar

District Bharatpur for offence under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner

was only a driver, his involvement is not made out from bare

perusal of the FIR. It is also contended that petitioner has been

granted bail in similar type of offences by this Court.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

It is contended that petitioner in connivance with the other co-

accused got a vehicle purchased from the petitioner on the

assurance that his vehicle would earn Rs. 26,000/- per month as it

would be given on hire to some company. Later on, they informed

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-15258/2020]

the complainant that his vehicle has been stolen. It is also

contended that as many as twelve cases are registered against

petitioner which include nine cases of similar nature.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

State, I am not inclined to entertain the bail application.

7. This bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /37

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter