SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Pooranmal Nagda vs State on 17 February, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2071/2020

Pooranmal Nagda S/o Shri Unkarlal Nagda, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Bohada, Badi Sadari, Distt. Chittorgarh, At Present
Amritnagar, Debari, Distt. Udaipur (Raj.).

—-Petitioner
Versus
State, Through Pp
—-Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anuj Sahlot
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudhir Tak, PP

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

17/02/2020
This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the

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

No.01/20, Police Station Sukher, District Udaipur, for the offences

under Sections 354 IPC Section 11(4),12 of the POCSO Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the

incident, the proceedings under Section 107 and 151 Cr.P.C. were

already against the present petitioner on a complaint being lodged

by the mother of the victim Mst. ‘A’. For the same incident, father

of the victim has lodged the present FIR.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and

upon a consideration of the arguments advanced, this Court is of

(Downloaded on 17/02/2020 at 08:51:34 PM)
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-2071/2020]

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 Pooranmal Nagda S/o

Unkarlal Nagda, in connection with F.I.R. No.01/20, Police

Station Sukher, District Udaipur, the petitioner shall be released on

bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) along with two

sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees: Twenty Five Thousand Only)

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.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

100-praveen/-

(Downloaded on 17/02/2020 at 08:51:34 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2020 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