Vinod Kumar Meena vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 7 December, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16095 / 2017
Vinod Kumar Meena S/o Late Prabhu Dayal @ Prabhat Meena B/c
Meena, R/o Badala Ki Dhani, Gram Jhar, Police Thana Bassi,
District Jaipur, At Present R/o Plot No.163, Goverdhanpuri, Nearby
Galta Gate, Jaipur.
—-Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through PP.
—-Respondent

__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Singhal.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek, Public Prosecutor.
For Complainant: Mr. Hari Kishan Sharma.
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Order
07/12/2017

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by

the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with F.I.R.

No.338/2017 registered at Police Station Thana Bassi, District

Jaipur for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 452 and 354

IPC.

On hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

Public prosecutor, learned counsel for the complainant and taking

into consideration the fact that cross cases have been registered

between the parties on the same day and allegation of offence

under Section 354 IPC has been made not only against the

petitioner but also other four persons and the petitioner is working

on the post of Assistant in PHED, this Court is persuaded to grant
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-16095/2017]

indulgence of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to the

petitioner.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is
directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Vinod Kumar
Meena son of Late Prabhu Dayal @ Prabhat Meena in connection
with F.I.R. No.338/2017 registered at Police Station Thana Bassi,
District Jaipur, the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he
furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with
two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the
concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following
conditions :-

(i). that the petitioner shall make himself available for
interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii). that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such facts to the court or any police officer; and

(iii). that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous

permission of the court.

(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ) J.

Manoj/6

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *