SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mukesh & Anr vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 November, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 8193 / 2017

1. Mukesh Son of Ram Swaroop

2. Sumitra Wife of Shri Mukesh, Both by Caste Jangid (Suthar),
Resident of Ramjanji Ka Hatha, Laxman Nagar, Nandari, Jodhpur.

—-Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan

—-Respondent
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kausar Praveen
For Respondent(s) : Mr. JP Bhardwaj, PP
Mr DS Udawat for Complainant
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Order
23/11/2017

This bail application has been filed under Section 438 CrPC in

connection with FIR No.230/2017 registered at Police Station

Jetran, Pali for the offence under Section 498A, 426, 323, 420 IPC

whereupon the investigation was commenced. Apprehending their

arrest, the petitioner moved the bail application before the court

below, which was dismissed. Hence, this bail application has been

filed.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor and perused the material made available on record.

Learned Public Prosecutor and Complainant opposed the bail

application.

(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-8193/2017]

Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case

and without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of

the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the

petitioners.

Therefore, this bail application filed under Section 438 CrPC

is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of

petitioners Mukesh Son of Ram Swaroop and Sumitra Wife of

Shri Mukesh in the aforesaid FIR, shall be released on bail by

the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer, provided each of them

furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two

sureties each in the like amount to his/her satisfaction on the

following conditions:

i) That the petitioner(s) shall make himself/themselves
available for interrogation by a police officer, as and
when required;

ii) That the petitioner(s) 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 to any police officer;

iii) That the petitioner(s) shall not leave without
previous permission of the court;

iv) That the petitioner(s) shall not commit any offence
similar to the offence of which he/she/they is/are
accused or suspected.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)J.

Anil Kumar Choudhary

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh