SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rakesh Kumar And Anr vs State on 9 July, 2018

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 5726/2018

1. Rakesh Kumar S/o Santram , By Caste Jat, Resident Of
12 A.s., Tehsil Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar.

2. Girdavari Devi W/o Santram , By Caste Jat, Resident Of
12 A.s., Tehsil Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar.

The State Of Rajasthan

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K. V. Vyas, PP




This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the

petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R.

No.167/2012, Police Station Ramsinghpura, District Sriganganagar

for the offences under Sections 498A and 304B of the IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

cognizance against the present petitioners have been taken after

the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been allowed. Prior

to that investigating agency has not submitted charge-sheet

against the present petitioners.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail.

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-5726/2018]

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and

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

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

petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioners (1) Rakesh Kumar S/o

Santram (2) Girdavari Devi W/o Santram, in connection with

F.I.R. No.167/2012, Police Station Ramsinghpura, District

Sriganganagar, the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided

they 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 petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) that the petitioners 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 petitioners shall not leave India without previous
permission of the court.

Solanki Sunil/-


Powered by TCPDF (

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


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