SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shahid Rja vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 July, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7892/2019

1. Shahid Rja S/o Shabir Ahmad, Aged About 25 Years,
Nagaur

2. Shabir Ahmad S/o Najamudin, Aged About 70 Years,
Nagaur

3. Mustafa Raja S/o Shabir Ahmad, Aged About 28 Years,
Nagaur

4. Mariam Bano W/o Shabir Ahmad, Aged About 60 Years,
Nagaur

5. Gani Khan S/o Jamaludin Khan, Aged About 70 Years,
Nagaur

6. Jamil Ahmad S/o Gani Khan, Aged About 40 Years,
Nagaur

7. Mohammad Raja S/o Gani Khan, Aged About 25 Years,
Nagaur

8. Iliyas S/o Gani Khan, Aged About 20 Years, B/c Sherani
R/o Sherani Aabad, Ps Khunkhuna, Tehsil Didwana,
District Nagaur

—-Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

—-Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Hussain

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP

Mr. Rajak Khan, for complainant

(Downloaded on 12/07/2019 at 10:41:13 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLMB-7892/2019]

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

12/07/2019

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with

FIR No.163/2017 of Police Station Khunkhuna, Distt. Nagaur

for the offences punishable under Sections 147, Section148, Section149,

Section452, Section323, Section336, Section498A, Section354, Section406 and Section341 IPC.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has

submitted that he does not want to press the anticipatory bail

application preferred on behalf of petitioner No.1 – Shahid

Rja S/o Shabir Ahmad.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application preferred on

behalf of petitioner No.1- Shahid Rja S/o Shabir Ahmad is

dismissed as not pressed.

So far as petitioner Nos.2 to 8 are concerned, it is

submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since a

matrimonial dispute is going on between petitioner No.1 –

Shahid Rja and his wife, several relatives from both the

parties hold a meeting for settlement of the matrimonial

dispute, however, during deliberations, some altercation took

place between them, in which, both the parties scuffled with

each other and received injuries. Learned counsel for the

petitioners has submitted that the allegation regarding

preparation of commission of offence levelled against the

(Downloaded on 12/07/2019 at 10:41:13 PM)
(3 of 4) [CRLMB-7892/2019]

petitioners is false and such incident took place suddenly

during the course of deliberations between the parties.

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for

the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail

application.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and

circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on

the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner Nos.2 to 8 under Section

438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438

Cr.P.C. preferred on behalf of petitioner Nos.2 to 8 is allowed

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

Nos.2 to 8 namely Shabir Ahmad S/o Najamudin,

Mustafa Raja S/o Shabir Ahmad, Mariam Bano W/o

Shabir Ahmad, Gani Khan S/o Jamaludin Khan, Jamil

Ahmad S/o Gani Khan, Mohammad Raja S/o Gani Khan

and Iliyas S/o Gani Khan in FIR No.163/2017 of Police

Station Khunkhuna, Distt. Nagaur, they shall be enlarged on

bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the

sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureties

of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned

I.O./S.H.O. on the following conditions:-

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

(Downloaded on 12/07/2019 at 10:41:13 PM)

(4 of 4) [CRLMB-7892/2019]

(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 any police officer; and

(iii) that the petitioner(s) shall not leave India
without previous permission of the court.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

141-msrathore/-

(Downloaded on 12/07/2019 at 10:41:13 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

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.

STUDY REPORTS

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