CRLMB6239/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.6239/2010 Naresh Bhatnagar Vs. The State of Rajasthan Date of Order ::: 16.07.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Arvind Kumar Gupta, Counsel for petitioner Shri Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor Shri Rajneesh Gupta, Counsel for complainant #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for complainant and perused the material made available to me during the arguments of the case. Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that even though in the beginning of the complaint the complainant stated that initial amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was given to both, the accused-petitioner Naresh Bhatnagar and co-accused Dinesh Bhatnagar, who is his brother, but in the entire complaint and thereafter from the statements of witnesses it would be evident that it was Dinesh who promised to get an appointment to the complainant, through co-accused Ankit Gupta @ Lucky. It is Dinesh who received different installments of payment and took the complainant to different places. Independent witness Rajnikant Sharma in his statement clearly stated that the money of Rs.3,00,000/- was initially given to Dinesh in presence of accused-petitioner Naresh herein; thus money was actually given to co-accused Dinesh himself, and the present-petitioner had nothing to do with his activities. In fact, the present petitioner himself filed a criminal case CRLMB6239/2010 // 2 // for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 452 IPC against co-accused Dinesh because he forged documents and cheated the present petitioner as well and that FIR was lodged against him on 10th May, 2010 whereas the present FIR was lodged on 18th May, 2010. The petitioner was arrested on 9th June, 2010 and thus has remained behind the bar for about 40 days. No more recovery is to be made from the petitioner in as much as the investigation is almost complete. Two other accused are to be arrested and therefore filing of challan may be delayed and eventually the trial may also take a long. There is no previous case ever registered against the petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant opposed the bail 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, Naresh Bhatnagar Son of Indrajeet Bhatnagar on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.292/2010, Police Station Neem-Ka-Thana, District Sikar, under Sections 420, 406, 463, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC and under Section 3(1)(10) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- 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. The bail application stands disposed of. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//