Hariram Yadav S/O Sh. Roodmal ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 2132 Raj/2

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
                                1710/2021

Hariram Yadav S/o Sh. Roodmal Yadav, Aged About 31 Years,
R/o Thanagagi Dist. Alwar
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nishant Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Bhadu, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

04/03/2021

1. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.294/2019 was registered at Police Station, Patan,

District Sikar for offence under Sections 384, 420, 467, 468, 471,

120-B I.P.C.

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

petitioner was only driver of the purchaser. Installments were to

be paid by the purchaser. Petitioner is not in any way involved

with the alleged offence.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. It

is contended that petitioner has criminal antecedents.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contention put forth by counsel for the

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-1710/2021]

petitioner, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.

7. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. The

S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Patan, District Sikar in F.I.R.

No. 294/2019 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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with

two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand

only) 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

ARTI SHARMA /56

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)