IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Criminal Misc. IIIrd Bail Appl. No. 929/2010 Prabhu Dayal Vs. State of Rajasthan Dated : 11.02.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. Mr. Ravi Yadav, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Punia, P.P. for the State. Mr. Manish Gupta for the complainant. This order governs the disposal of third bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by Shri Ravi Yadav, Advocate on behalf of the applicant Prabhu Dayal pertaining to F.I.R. No.184/2008 of police station Sadar, Jaipur City, Jaipur (South), in the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 120-B of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant as also learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that from a bare perusal of the complaint as also the statements of the witnesses recorded by the Police during investigation, only an offence under Section 419 of IPC is made out, which is bailable. Even if we take it to be true that the offence under Section 420 IPC is made out, then also the petitioner is entitled to get indulgence of bail, as he has been in -2- custody for more than six months i.e. from 26 th July, 2009. Learned counsel further contended that PW/1 Prabhu Dayal and PW/3 Vedvrat have been examined. He took me through the statements of Prabhu Dayal and contended that in his cross examination PW/1 Prabhu Dayal categorically stated that the accused Prabhu Dayal had a deal with the complainant Vedvrat at his instance or at his behest. It is true that the accused Prabhu Dayal obtained Rs.21,000/- from Vedvrat but later on he handed over the entire amount to him, but so far as the sale deed is concerned, it was executed by the original Prabhu Dayal S/o Bhura Ram R/o of Annantpura. Since the petitioner has been in custody more than six months, hence, he may be granted indulgence of bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State as also learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail petition and canvassed that it is the accused Prabhu Dayal only who projected himself to be the original Prabhu Dayal S/o Shri Bhura Ram R/o of Annantpura and had a deal with regard to sale of land with Vedvrat. While projecting himself to be real Prabhu Dayal, he obtained Rs.21,000/- from the complainant, thus cheated him, hence, he should not be granted bail. 5. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and perused the relevant material available on record including the statement of PW/1 Prabhu Dayal and PW/3 Vedvrat, it is noticed that the sale deed of the said land was executed in favour of -3- Vedvrat by PW/1 Prabhu Dayal S/o Bhura Ram R/o Annantpura. The petitioner accused Prabhu Dayal S/o Shri Bhura Ram is the resident of village Chhota Gudha. It is he who is alleged to have projected himself to be the resident of Annantpura. 6. I, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, but keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for the last six months, deem it just and proper that the petitioner deserves to be granted indulgence of bail and his third bail petition is ordered to be allowed. 7. It is, therefore, ordered that the accused petitioner Prabhu Dayal S/o Shri Bhura Ram, in F.I.R. No. 184/208 of police station Sadar, Jaipur City, Jaipur (South), shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) together with two surety bonds each of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till the trial is concluded. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg