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
12 paragraphs · 230 wordsThe present application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.92/2018, Police
Station Paroli, District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 409, 464, 467, 468, 471, 474 & 120-B of IPC
Heard. Perused the material available on record.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the nature of accusation, the gravity of the offence, material on record in support thereof and taking into consideration the totality of
the facts and circumstances of the present case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to extend the benefit under
Section 438 Cr.P.C. to the petitionerd. Accordingly, the application preferred by the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
However, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are ready to surrender before the concerned court, which may consider their bail
application on the same day.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice, it is directed that if the petitioners (1) Madan Lal
S/o Sh. Shiv Dan Dholi & (2) Ghanshyam S/o Sh. Shankar Lal Dholi surrender before the trial Court on or before 18/03/2020 and file a bail application
there, the Court concerned shall consider their bail application preferably on the same day in accordance with law.