1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6809/2009 Jagdish Vishnoi vs. State of Rajasthan Date of Order :: 07.09.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. Biri Singh, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Fauzdar, Public Prosecutor for the State of Rajasthan Mr. Satish Bijarniya, counsel for the complainant This order governs the disposal of bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by Shri Biri Singh, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner Jagdish Vishnoi pertaining to F.I.R. No. 62/2009 of police station Chandwaji, District Jaipur for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 120-B 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. Learned counsel for the petitioner has canvassed that one Prabhat adopted Bhagwan Sahai as his son, who got the agricultural land of his share in possession. It is alleged that Bhagwan Sahai executed one power of attorney in the name of petitioner Jagdish Vishnoi, who sold this land to Ramesh Garg, the Director of Empire Land Construction Private Limited, Jaipur. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further canvassed that the petitioner being the power of attorney holder sold the land-in-dispute to Ramesh Garg with all bonafides. Hence, he has committed no 2 offence. The complainant Hajari has nothing to do with the land-in-dispute. There has been a civil litigation between the parties. The complainant is said to have purchased the land-in-dispute from Bhonri Devi, who had no authority to sell the land. The petitioner has been falsely implicated, whereas he is in no way connected with the alleged offences of the instant case. He has been in custody since 25th August, 2009, hence he may be granted indulgence of bail. 4. The learned PP appearing for the State as also the learned counsel for the complainant, both, have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that Prabhat Ram had only one issue and she was Bhonri Devi. He had 4.22 ha. land in his name. Since Prabhat had adopted Bhagwan Sahai as his son, so Bhagwan Sahai and Bhonri Devi had the equal share 2.11 – 2.11 ha. land in the said land, but Bhagwan Sahai out of 4.22 ha. Land sold 2.59 ha. land. When Bhonri Devi came to know about it, she filed a suit in the court of Tehsildar, Amer. Meantime, Bhagwan Sahai executed one power of attorney on 15th June, 2007 in favour of the petitioner Jagdish Vishnoi, who sold this land to one Ramesh Garg and obtained fifty lacs of rupees. Prior to that, Tehsildar, Amer passed an order in favour of Bhonri Devi and thus, the mutation was opened in her name. Thereafter Bhonri Devi sold this land on 15th September, 2007 to Hajari Lal by way of registered sale deed. Hajari Lal also got this land mutated in his name. Thereafter Hajari Lal also sold this land to Sanwar Mal Agarwal vide sale letter dated 3rd May, 2008. Learned PP has further 3 contended that the petitioner Jagidsh Vishnoi knowing it fully well that the judgment had been passed by the Tehsildar, Amer in favour of Bhonri Devi, the petitioner sold this land to Ramesh Garg and obtained fifty lacs rupees from him, whereas he had no authority to sell this land. The petitioner not only committed a cheating, but forged the documents also, which he used them as they were genuine. The disputed land is very costly and on account of escalation in land price in recent times, the value of the land has unimaginably enhanced. In view of this position, the bail application may be dismissed. 5. Having reflected over the submissions made at the bar and carefully scanned the relevant material on record, I, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, but keeping in view the gravity and the manner, in which the offence of cheating and forgery is found to have been committed, do not deem it just and proper to grant any indulgence of bail to the petitioner and the bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner deserves to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner Jagdish Vishnoi stands dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI), J. DK/-