IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Radheshyam - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLMB 968 of 2025
Decided On : 20-03-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, and 120-B - Anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner apprehending arrest in connection with FIR for serious offences - Co-accused granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench - Petitioner’s case not worse than co-accused - Court finds it a fit case for anticipatory bail. (Paras 1-6)
(B) Grant of anticipatory bail - Court considers the facts and circumstances of the case, and the principle of parity in granting bail to co-accused - Conditions imposed for bail include making oneself available for interrogation and not leaving India without permission of the court. (Paras 5-6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.176/2013 for offences including cheating and forgery. Co-accused had previously been granted bail, and the petitioner argued for similar relief based on parity.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. due to the circumstances of the case.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail considering the bail granted to co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the petitioner’s situation was comparable to that of the co-accused, warranting a similar outcome in granting bail.
Result: Bail application allowed.
Order :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J
1. This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.176/2013, registered at Police Station Maha Mandir, District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that co-accused persons namely Manohar Lal (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3790/2014) and Vikas Garg (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3269/2014) have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 09.10.2014 and 22.05.2014 respectively. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not worse than that of the above named co- accused persons who have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail and thus, no fruitful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars. It was prayed that therefore, the petitioner may be released on anticipatory bail.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the above named co-accused persons have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the impugned order.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the Bar, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner- Radheshyam S/o Shri Poonam Chand in connection with F.I.R. No.176/2013, registered at Police Station Maha Mandir, District Jodhpur, the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. 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.
The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. due to parity with co-accused who had previously been granted bail.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments presented.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there is insufficient evidence to warrant custodial interrogation, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the right to personal liberty.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the compromise between the parties and the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation.
The court's decision was influenced by the specific allegations, lack of signatures on the document, and the arguments presented in the case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the necessity for the appellants to cooperate if thei....
Anticipatory bail may be granted when allegations are civil in nature, ensuring proper conditions to safeguard judicial proceedings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.