Hanuman Agarwal Son Of Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 1828 Raj/2

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 589/2023

Hanuman Agarwal Son Of Shri Vishvanath Agarwal, Resident Of
Kunjdiyon Ka Chowk, Near Sabji Mandi Jhunjhunu (Raj.) At
Present House No. 8 C71 Pratap Nagar Tonk, Phatak, Jaipur The
Than Junior Accountant In The Rajasthan State Food Civil
Supplies Department, Kisan Bhawan, Lalkothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur
(Raj.)
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)         :    Mr. Pavan Sharma
                               Mr. Neeraj Sharma
For Respondent(s)         :    Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

08/02/2023

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

Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.390/2013 registered at Police

Station Pradhan Aarakshi Kendra, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur

for the offence under Sections 13(1)(E) and 13(2) of the

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case. Present FIR was lodged in

the year 2013. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner.

There is no evidence regarding demand and acceptance of the

bribe. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required.

Investigating Agency is going to submit charge sheet in this

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

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-589/2023]

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

following judgments:-(1) Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar

Pradesh & anr. in Criminal Appeal No.227/2018; (2) Pramod

Kumar Mittal vs. State of Raj. in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No.12910/2022 decided on 26.8.2022 and Mahaveer

Singh vs. State of Raj. in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application

No.13336/2022 decided on 14.12.2022.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments

advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that

petitioner was Junior Accountant in Food and Civil Supply

Department. At the time of incident, huge amount was recovered

from the petitioner. So, looking to the gravity of offence, bail be

dismissed.

5. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

6. It is admitted position that petitioner was Junior Accountant

in Food and Civil Supply Department. At the time of raid of ACD

department huge amount was recovered from the petitioner. He

has not furnished any evidence regarding this amount. So, looking

to the gravity of offence, I do not consider it a fit case to enlarge

the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Hence, the bail application filed by the petitioner stands

dismissed.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Brijesh 127.

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)