Dharma Ram vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 4417 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2683/2022

Dharma Ram S/o Sh. Bhalu Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Patwa, Teh. Jaitaran, Dist. Pali.

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lakshya Singh Udawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, PP Mr. Bhawani Singh for the complainant

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

Order

21/03/2022

This application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in

connection with F.I.R. No.37/2022, Police Station Jaitaran, District

Pali, for the offences under Sections 332 and 353 of the Indian

Penal Code.

Heard and considered the arguments advance by learned

counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant. Perused the

material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that offences are

triable by Magistrate; compromise has taken place between the

parties, this fact was submitted before learned trial Court but the

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-2683/2022]

learned trial Court rejected the bail application of the petitioner on

the basis of judgment dated 05.09.2019 passed by Hon'ble the

Supreme Court in the case of "P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of

Enforcement" reported in AIR 2019 SC 4198, which states that,

"In a case of money-laundering, anticipatory bail should not be

granted, as Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure is to be

invoked only in exceptional cases where the case alleged is

frivolous or groundless." With these submissions, learned counsel

for the petitioner prays that benefit of anticipatory bail may be

granted to the petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has requested to pass

an appropriate order in the matter.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant

stated that factum of compromise has been verified by him.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,

particularly looking to the facts mentioned in the case of P.

Chidambaram (supra) mentioned in the rejection order; and the

facts that offences are triable by the First Class Magistrate;

compromise has taken place between the parties; and no situation

is explained for which custodial interrogation is required in this

matter, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case

for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438

Cr.P.C.

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2683/2022]

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioner- Dharma Ram S/o Sh.

Bhalu Ram, in connection with F.I.R. No.37/2022, Police

Station Jaitaran, District Pali, 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.

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J 35-/rashi/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)