Harshdeep Kaur vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 2195 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 889/2021

Harshdeep Kaur W/o Harbansh Singh, Aged About 34 Years, Chakk 6 Jm, Ramsinghpur, Tehsil Anoopgarh, Sriganganagar.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Farzand Ali, AAG-cum-GA Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

Judgment / Order

27/01/2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the

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

No.272/2019 Police Station Anoopgarh, Sriganganagar for the

offences under Sections 420 & 418 IPC.

The allegations set out in the FIR resonate overtones of a

civil dispute. The FIR was registered way back in the year 2019.

There is no requirement for custodial interrogation of the accused

petitioner in this case.

Thus, having regard to the entirety of facts and

circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of

the arguments advanced at the bar, 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-889/2021]

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioner Harshdeep Kaur W/o Shri

Harbansh Singh in connection with F.I.R. No.272/2019 Police

Station Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar, 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

66-Sudhir Asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)