Rajasthan High Court
Hansraj Meena S/O Shri Gokal Ram Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:7392) on 13 February, 2024
Author: Praveer Bhatnagar
Bench: Praveer Bhatnagar
[2024:RJ-JP:7392]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Anticipatory Bail Application No.
14034/2023
Hansraj Meena S/o Shri Gokal Ram Meena, aged about 31 Years,
R/o Village Dabla Mev, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through P.P.
2. Victim, R/o
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohar Pal Meena
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar, PP
Mr. S.N. Khinchi
Mr. Kishan Swami
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Order
13/02/2024
1. Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.73/2016
registered at Police Station Rajgarh, District Alwar for the
offence(s) under Sections 376, 366 & 506 IPC, the petitioner has
preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 438
Cr.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that vide
order dated 17.10.2023 learned trial Court has taken cognizance
under Section 366 IPC and called the accused-petitioner through
summon. the accused-petitioner is in apprehension that if the
accused-petitioner appear before the concerned Court then, the
said Court may deny bail to the accused-petitioner and sent him
behind the bar, therefore, this anticipatory bail of the accused-
(Downloaded on 13/02/2024 at 08:55:33 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:7392] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14034/2023]
petitioner may be allowed. Learned counsel for the accused-
petitioner in support of his arguments, relied upon the order and
judgment of Coordinate Bench of this Court passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Bail Cancellation Application No.11198/2014: Puran
Chander Sen Vs. State of Raj. & Ors, decided on 09.10.2014.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel
appearing on behalf of respondent-complainant vehemently
oppose the bail application and contended that there is no
reasonable apprehension that accused-petitioner shall be arrested.
The learned trial Court vide order dated 17.10.2023 called the
accused-petitioner through summon therefore, the anticipatory
bail application of the accused-petitioner may be rejected.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Public
Prosecutor and perused the material available on record as well as
the judgment/order relied upon by learned counsel for the
petitioner.
5. The Coordinate Bench in Puran Chander Sen (supra) after referring the judgment passed by different High Court held that if in pursuance of the bailable warrants, accused appear before the Court of Magistrate in case of a non-bailable offence, there is every apprehension that the said Court may deny bail to the accused and send him behind the bars.
6. Therefore, in the case when the accused have been summoned through bailable warrant the anticipatory bail may be granted.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the order/judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, without commenting anything on the merits/demerits (Downloaded on 13/02/2024 at 08:55:33 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:7392] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14034/2023] of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner.
8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the accused- petitioner Hansraj Meena S/o Shri Gokal Ram Meena is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Rajgarh District Alwar in F.I.R. No.72/2016 is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused-petitioner- Hansraj Meena S/o Shri Gokal Ram Meena, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station 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.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J 149-/DHARMENDRA RAKHECHA (Downloaded on 13/02/2024 at 08:55:33 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)