Nature Of Offences Involved & Charges Levelled Have To Be Taken Into Account While Considering Anticipatory Bail Plea: Rajasthan HC
The Rajasthan High Court observed that, while considering an application seeking anticipatory bail, it is the duty of the court to take into account the nature of the offences involved and the charges levelled against the persons alleged.
The Court was deciding a batch of criminal miscellaneous bail applications arising out of FIRs involving same facts and questions of law.
A Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand said, “While considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, no doubt, the Court has to take into consideration the personal liberty of the accused as a relevant factor, however, at the same time it is the duty of the Court to take into account the nature of the offences involved and the charges levelled against the persons alleged.”
Advocate S.S. Hora appeared for the petitioners while Senior Advocate Madhav Mitra appeared for the respondent.
In this case, four FIRs were registered against the petitioner wherein allegation was that he concocted and forged certain pattas which were never issued by the Ajmer Development Authority (ADA). He was arrested in 2021 wherein he remained at police station for one week and thereafter, was granted bail in 2022. He was very much available with the Investigating Agency at the time of his arrest and prior to his arrest, investigation of FIRs was clubbed but he was not arrested in the other three FIRs.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused cannot be allowed to be arrested in subsequent FIRs merely because the recovery is likely to be effected at his instance. The counsel submitted that except one patta, no other document was recovered at his instance and now he cannot be allowed to be arrested in three other FIRs only because the Police wants to arrest for the purpose of recovery of other documents.
The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case observed, “Reverting back to facts of the instant case that it is not in dispute that the co-accused Vinat Mahavar was arrested in FIR No. 163/2021 and he was granted regular bail under Section 439 CrPC vide order dated 15.03.2022. … Serious allegations have been levelled in all the FIRs that the fabricated and forged pattas and documents have been created and lakhs of rupees have been taken for handing over these pattas to the victims. In order to ascertain the truth, the matter is required to be investigated by the Investigating Agency.”
The Court considered the fact with regard to similar nature of allegations of creation of forged, fabricated pattas and documents, five FIRs were lodged against the petitioner and keeping the same in the mind and also considering the nature of allegation and gravity of the matter, the court refused to accept the bail applications.
Accordingly, the Court rejected the bail applications.
Cause Title- Dilip Sharma v. State of Rajasthan
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates S.S. Hora, Amar Kumar, Prahlad Sharma, and Uddeshya Vijayvargya.
Respondent: Senior Advocate Madhav Mitra, PP Babulal Nasuna, Advocates Javed Khan, Veerendra Singh, Kartikey Johary, and Rahul Agarwal.
