CRLMB3880/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.3880/2010 Kanhaiyalal Vs. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor Date of Order ::: 19.05.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri R.M. Jain, Counsel for petitioner Shri Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material made available to me during the arguments of the case. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that registration of the vehicle for which it is alleged that it was sold under forged signature prepared by the petitioner, does not stand in the name of complainant Prabhulal but rather it is in the name of third party Bhagwan Singh. The said vehicle was given to petitioner by none other than complainant Prabhulal himself for being sold with a duly signed sale letter. When the vehicle was not sold, he returned it back to the complainant. It was stolen from his house and allegation of theft is against Nathu @ Bablu. The petitioner has got nothing to do with the theft of the vehicle. Allegation of theft against him also does not stand because the vehicle was not in the name of complainant Prabhulal. Petitioner was arrested on 28.02.2010. Nothing is now to be recovered at the instance of the petitioner. Investigation in the matter is almost complete. In two out of three cases said to be registered against him, he has already been acquitted. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail CRLMB3880/2010 // 2 // application. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, I deem it just and proper to release the accused-petitioner, namely, Kanhaiyalal Son of Shri Gopi Nath on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.181/2009, Police Station Vijay Nagar, Ajmer, District Ajmer, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties of Rs.15000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. However, in case petitioner is found involved in repeating the similar offence at any point of time the prosecution will be at liberty to apply for cancellation of his bail. The bail application stands disposed of. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//