Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mohan Khadia Vs. State of Rajasthan

Mohan Khadia vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Application dismissed Court Rajasthan Decided Mar 08, 1977
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/767197

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 258/77
Subject
Criminal
Disposition
Application dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code - Section 400 & 437 Anticipatory bail--Provisions of Section 437 not to be by passed Courts not given unbridged powers--Provisions of Section 408 to be utilized when innocent persons are harassed.;Application Dismissed - - The petitioner has failed to make out a special case for issuanc...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Outcome / disposition
Application dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohan Khadia

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1977WLN456

Excerpt

criminal procedure code - section 400 & 437 anticipatory bail--provisions of section 437 not to be by passed courts not given unbridged powers--provisions of section 408 to be utilized when innocent persons are harassed.;application dismissed - - the petitioner has failed to make out a special case for issuance of a direction under section 438 cr.m.l. shrimal, j.1. heard learned counsel. the accused petitioner is required in a case registered at the police station, kotwali, jaipur. the amount involved is said to be rs. 2,97,986.62. a first information report regarding this embezzlement & forgery was registered at the police station on april 28, 1976. the co-accused was arrested in may, 1976 and is still in jail, but the accused-petitioner has not yet been apprehended. he was a cashier in the bank at the relevant time. section 437 cr. p.c is the main provision for bail in regard to non bailable offences. it is followed by section 438 cr. p.c., a provision for the grant of anticipatory bail. it is manifest that condition imposed by section 437(1) cr. p.c. are implicitly contained in section 438 cr. p.c. otherwise the result would be that persons coming from influential section of the society would be able to thwart the investigation and get them admitted to bail. the legislature did not intend that accused charged with serious offences should be allowed to bypass the provisions of section 437 cr. p.c. section 438 cr. p.c. does not confer unbridled and unguided powers on the courts. the provisions of section 438 cr. p.c. are required to be utilised when the prosecution agency misdirects or attends to oppress and harass innocent persons for political or other reasons. the petitioner has failed to make out a special case for issuance of a direction under section 438 cr. p.c.2. the application is devoid of merits and it is dismissed.

Full Judgment

M.L. Shrimal, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel. The accused petitioner is required in a case registered at the Police Station, Kotwali, Jaipur. The amount involved is said to be Rs. 2,97,986.62. A first information report regarding this embezzlement & forgery was registered at the Police Station on April 28, 1976. The co-accused was arrested in May, 1976 and is still in jail, but the accused-petitioner has not yet been apprehended. He was a Cashier in the Bank at the relevant time. Section 437 Cr. P.C is the main provision for bail in regard to non bailable offences. It is followed by Section 438 Cr. P.C., a provision for the grant of anticipatory bail. It is manifest that condition Imposed by Section 437(1) Cr. P.C. are implicitly contained in Section 438 Cr. P.C. otherwise the result would be that persons coming from influential section of the society would be able to thwart the investigation and get them admitted to bail. The Legislature did not intend that accused charged with serious offences should be allowed to bypass the provisions of Section 437 Cr. P.C. Section 438 Cr. P.C. does not confer unbridled and unguided powers on the courts. The provisions of Section 438 Cr. P.C. are required to be utilised when the prosecution agency misdirects or attends to oppress and harass innocent persons for political or other reasons. The petitioner has failed to make out a special case for issuance of a direction under Section 438 Cr. P.C.

2. The application is devoid of merits and it is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial