SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Esuf Khan vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 September, 2018

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 8448/2018

Esuf Khan S/o Shri Nissar Khan, Aged About 24 Years, B/c
Muslim, R/o Silawato Ka Bass, Balesar, Distt. Jodhpur

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp


For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kaushal Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Awasthi, PP


Judgment / Order


This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the

petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR

No.139/2018, Police Station Boranada, District Jodhpur for the

offences under Sections 354 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that compromise

has been arrived at between the parties and the father of the

prosecutrix also appeared before the Investigating Officer and

submitted the compromise. In such circumstances, no useful

purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the

bars for indefinite time. Thus, the petitioner may be released on

anticipatory bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for

anticipatory bail.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

impugned order.

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-8448/2018]

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and

upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this

Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory

bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioner Esuf Khan S/o Shri Nissar

Khan in connection with FIR No.139/2018, Police Station

Boranada, District Jodhpur, the petitioner shall be released on bail;

provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- 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.



Powered by TCPDF (

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation