IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.5388/2009 Chittar Lal vs. State of Raj. Dated : 06.08.2009 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI, J. Mr. Ashvin Garg, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor for the State. This order governs the disposal of bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by Mr. Ashvin Garg, Advocate on behalf of the applicant Chittar Lal in FIR No. 114/2005 of police station Kotwali Bundi in the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The nub of the prosecution story is that the complainant Smt. Madhupal was married to Ramraj Meena on 25th November, 1994. Out of their wedlock one daughter named Karuna aged 5 years was born. Ramraj had a life insurance policy and the complainant was the nominee of Ramraj. It is alleged that one agent Mahaveer Jain produced before the authorities Rajesh daughter of Mangi Lal in place of Madhupal making them to understand that Rajesh was the Madhupal and obtained Rs.1,32,300/- on 19th October, 2004. That Rajesh was associated with co-accused persons, including Chittar Lal also, thus, they committed a cheating and the offence of forgery. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that it is Rajesh who knowingly -2- impersonated as Madhupal. The petitioner is the father of the deceased. He has not committed any cheating and forgery. On the contrary, he is innocent being the father of the deceased. He has also committed no cheating and forgery. The deceased had two wives, one Rajesh and another Madhupal. The complainant Madhupal has been living with her parents, whereas his second wife Rajesh is still with the petitioner. Rajesh has already been enlarged on bail, hence there being no evidence against him, the petitioner may be released on anticipatory bail. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the bail petition. 6. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the relevant material available on record, I without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, do feel inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner. 7. The bail petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C is allowed and the SHO/I.O. Of the Police Station Kotwali Bundi is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Chittar Lal S/o Gangaram in FIR No. 114/2005, registered for offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC he shall enlarge him on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- (i) He shall make himself for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required: (ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any -3- 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. (iv) He will not commit any offence during the period of bail. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg