High CourtsSingle Bench

Jaiveer Singh Tomar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 26 April 2022 · Citation: (2022) 04 MP CK 0083

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.20940 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 388 words

Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J

This is the first bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C filed by the applicant for grant of bail.

Applicant has been arrested on 07.04.2022 by Police Station, Maharajapura, District Gwalior (MP), in connection with Crime No.304/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 of IPC.

In brief, prosecution story is that on 22.06.2019 Deependra Kumar Tamotiya, Director Adityaz Hotel Limited, Gwalior lodged a computerized complaint at Police Station Maharajpura against Rajveer Singh Bhadoria and Anjana Bhadoria, who are husband and wife. He is owner of Adityaz Hotel in which Rajveer Singh is working as a Manager. On 18.06.2019 he got a notice from Advocate Harish Sharma in which it has been stated that between he and Rajveer Singh an agreement was executed on 16.2.2019. As per agreement 90% of income of the hotel will go to Rajveer Singh, despite the fact that he has not executed any agreement with Rajveer Singh. Wife of Rajveer Singh is expert in making forged signatures and she put forged signature on the agreement. On his report an offence under the aforesaid sections were registered. During investigation it came out that applicant-accused is a witness to the said agreement. He was arrested on 7.4.2022.

It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the offence. The conclusion of trial will take time. The applicant is ready to abide by all the conditions as may be imposed by the Court. On such premises, learned counsel for the applicant prayed for bail.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the application and has prayed for its rejection.

Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application should be allowed and by allowing the application it is ordered that if the applicant furnishes bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he should be released on bail.

He will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.