Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1721 (RAJ)

HARLAL SINGH v. STATE, THROUGH PP

2019-05-31

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar, brother-in-law of the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Chimna Ram, the complainant and also perused the material on record. 2. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 17/2019 of Police Station Kotwali Churu, Churu for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 193 and 120-B I.P.C. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 3. Mr. Vinod Kumar, brother-in-law of the petitioner, present in person, has submitted that in the FIR, it is alleged that the petitioner had submitted a forged mark-sheet of class 10th in the year 2015 for the purpose of contesting election for the post of Member of Zila Parishad, Churu. It is submitted that the FIR, in relation to the incident allegedly took place in January 2015, was filed in January, 2019 after around four years. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that allegation to this effect that forged mark-sheet of class-10th was furnished by the petitioner before the Returning Officer, is false. It is argued that the dispute regarding disqualification of the petitioner is pending before this Court in a writ petition. It is further submitted that the police, without investigating the allegations levelled in the FIR in proper manner, has arrested the petitioner. It is further argued that the petitioner is in judicial custody; investigation from him is already completed and the offences, for which the FIR has been filed, are triable by Magistrate. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Chimna Ram, the complainant, present in person, have vehemently opposed the bail application. The complainant has argued that the petitioner contested the election while furnishing a forged mark-sheet and the police after thorough investigation prima facie found the petitioner guilty of cheating and forging documents. The complainant has also submitted that despite being prohibitory orders passed by the District Collector, massive protests took place in Churu City by the supporters of the petitioner, who is at present Zila Pramukh of Zila Parishad Churu, therefore, taking into consideration of this aspect also, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. The complainant has also submitted that despite being prohibitory orders passed by the District Collector, massive protests took place in Churu City by the supporters of the petitioner, who is at present Zila Pramukh of Zila Parishad Churu, therefore, taking into consideration of this aspect also, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the fact that the offences for which the FIR has been filed against the petitioner are triable by Magistrate, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 6. Accordingly, this bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Harlal Singh S/o Mohan Lal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No. 17/2019 of Police Station Kotwali Churu, Churu provided he executes 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 learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.