SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vinod Kumar Meena vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 7 December, 2017

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16095 / 2017
Vinod Kumar Meena S/o Late Prabhu Dayal @ Prabhat Meena B/c
Meena, R/o Badala Ki Dhani, Gram Jhar, Police Thana Bassi,
District Jaipur, At Present R/o Plot No.163, Goverdhanpuri, Nearby
Galta Gate, Jaipur.
State of Rajasthan Through PP.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Singhal.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek, Public Prosecutor.
For Complainant: Mr. Hari Kishan Sharma.

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by

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

No.338/2017 registered at Police Station Thana Bassi, District

Jaipur for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 452 and 354


On hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

Public prosecutor, learned counsel for the complainant and taking

into consideration the fact that cross cases have been registered

between the parties on the same day and allegation of offence

under Section 354 IPC has been made not only against the

petitioner but also other four persons and the petitioner is working

on the post of Assistant in PHED, this Court is persuaded to grant
(2 of 2)

indulgence of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to the


Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is
directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Vinod Kumar
Meena son of Late Prabhu Dayal @ Prabhat Meena in connection
with F.I.R. No.338/2017 registered at Police Station Thana Bassi,
District Jaipur, the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he
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 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.



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Your email address will not be published.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