Prakash Kanwar vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 9124 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1756/2021

Prakash Kanwar W/o Hinglaj Dan, Aged About 38 Years, Sangara, Tehsil Fatehgarh, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State, Through P.P
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. D.S. Sodha
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

                                 Judgment

08/04/2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public

Prosecutor and perused the case diary.

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the

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

No.65/2016 Police Station Sangad, District Jaisalmer for the

offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC.

The pre-arrest bail applications filed on behalf of the

co-accused Smt. Dhel Kanwar, Smt. Kanchan, Smt. Jam Kanwar

and Smt Geeta Kanwar have been accepted by this Court. The

petitioner is a woman and her case also stands on a similar

footing.

Thus, having regard to the entirety of facts and

circumstances as available on record, this Court is of the opinion

that it is a fit case to extend the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the

petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-1756/2021]

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioner Prakash Kanwar W/o Shri

Hinglaj Dan in connection with F.I.R. No.65/2016 Police Station

Sangad, District Jaisalmer, the petitioner shall be released on bail;

provided she 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(s) shall make himself available for

interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(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.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J 72-Sudhir Asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)