[2023:RJ-JD:39612]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11856/2023 Prahlad S/o Sh. Manphool, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 7 Bkm Gudli, P.s. Jaitsar, Thesil-Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10035/2023

1 Bhagirath S/o Sh. Dularam, Aged About 50 Years, R/o . Amarpura Jatan, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar.

(Raj.)

2 Pawan S/o Sh. Radhakrishan, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 7 B K . M Gudli, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.)

----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shardul Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharwan Bishnoi, PP Mr. S.R. Godara HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARZAND ALI

Order

20/11/2023

1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing applications under Section 438 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioners. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

S.No. Particulars of the Case

1. FIR Number 448/2021

2. Having apprehension of being arrested in the afore-

mentioned matters, the petitioners have prayed for anticipatory bail on the ground that no case for the alleged offences is made out against them and their incarceration is not warranted. Petitioner Bhagirath is a witness and Prahlad is bonafide purchaser. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of anticipatory bail to the accused- petitioners and they have been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant oppose the bail application and submit that the present case is not fit for grant of anticipatory bails.

4. Have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record. It is reflecting that the petitioners purchased the property through a registered sale deed on 18.07.2014. After long lapse of time, it is alleged that the seller was not having competence and took benefit of forged documents. There is no material at this stage to infer that the petitioner was knowing the fact that the title of the seller was defective. Be that as it may. The submissions with regard to the petitioner being a bonafide purchaser cannot be thrown away at this stage. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required rather all the documents can be obtained from the Office. This Court, deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 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.

5. Accordingly, the instant bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Suratgarh City, District Sri Ganganagar in F.I.R. No. 448/2021 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners they shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnish 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 petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) that the petitioners 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