Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J
RAMBABU CHOUDHARY S/O SHRI KISHAN LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.1395/2023 registered at Police Station Muhana, District Jaipur City (South) for the offence(s) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 384, 427, 455 and 120B of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the Police after investigation, charge-sheeted the accused-petitioner for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 406 of IPC. It is also contended that the complainant filed an FIR containing the fact that two person came at his plot and demolished the structure, two persons named in the FIR have been exonerated by the Investigating Agency. It is also contended that there is nothing available on record indicating that the accused-petitioner has forged any document. In the investigation also, the police has not obtained the so-called forged documents. It is also concluded by the Investigating Agency that the accused-petitioner in collusion with Babu Lal Choudhary and Pramod Aggarwal cre
The court determined that insufficient evidence against the accused, alongside prolonged custody, justified granting bail despite prior similar allegations.
The court denied bail based on substantial evidence of collusion and deceit among the accused-petitioners in executing forged documents, causing significant financial loss.
Bail should not be withheld as a pre-trial punishment – Criminal Court, exercising jurisdiction to grant of bail or anticipatory bail is not expected to act as a recovery agent to realize dues of com....
Criminal proceedings are not meant for recovery of disputed dues; the presumption of innocence underlies the decision to grant bail when no risk of flight or witness tampering is established.
Anticipatory bail granted as custodial investigation not required; petitioners implicated as witnesses in alleged forgery, not beneficiaries.
The court emphasized that serious allegations of forgery and cheating warrant denial of bail, especially when they undermine the integrity of recruitment processes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
