Sunderlal vs State Of Rajasthan

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with FIR No.200/2017 of Police Station Udaimandir, Jodhpur (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that disputed Will was executed in favour of the petitioner in the year 1999 and later on in the year 2012 the property in question was transferred in the name of Harsvardhan. It is submitted that before transferring the said property in favour of Harsvardhan, a joint public notice was issued by the Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur inviting objections from interested person in the daily newspaper but no such objection has ever been raised by anybody. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has already joined investigation and no further investigation is required to be made from him and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Sunderlal S/o Shri Bhanwarlal in FIR No.200/2017, Police Station Udaimandir, Jodhpur (East), he shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/-each to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./S.H.O. on the following conditions:-

(i) He shall make himself available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) He 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 to any Police Officer;

(iii) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.