BALU KHAN @ IKBAL KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-petitioner has laid this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., arising out of FIR No. 259/2017, registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 418, 420, 468, 470, 473, 474 IPC.

(2.) The first bail application of the petitioner bearing No. 6577/2017 was dismissed on 17.08.2017.

(3.) Pressing this second bail application, it is argued by learned counsel that during trial, statements of I.O. Chandrabhan (P.W.5) were recorded and on subjecting him to cross-examination by counsel for the petitioner he has very candidly admitted that no recovery was made from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that I.O. has not castigated the petitioner for preparation of forged documents and also admitted that after sanction and disbursement of loan, entire amount was deposited in the bank account of travel agency. It is also urged by learned counsel that the I.O. has specifically denied the fact that the tractor was handed over to the petitioner by travel agency which he subsequently transferred to third party. Learned counsel has also argued that during investigation, nothing has come to the fore that petitioner was having any nexus with the functioning of the travel agency, therefore, in that background his second bail application merits favourable consideration.