Maqbool Ansari Son Of Shri Subhan ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3678 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

    S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4975/2022

Maqbool Ansari Son Of Shri Subhan Miya, R/o Village Sungari
Vela, Post Cherki Vera Garua, Ps Gurua, District Gaya, Bihar.
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                     ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Meenakshi Pancholi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mahala, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

10/05/2022

This bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

in connection with FIR No.155/2021 registered at Police Station

Mahila Thana, Jaipur City (North) for the offence(s) under Section

498-A, 406, 323, 341 and 120-B IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing is to be recovered

from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits

that FIR was lodged after inordinate delay. Marriage was

solemnized in the year 2011. So, the petitioner be enlarged on

anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon

the following judgments :- (1) Arun Vyas & Anr. Vs. Anita

Vyas decided on 14.05.1999 and (2) Vanka Radhamanohari

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-4975/2022]

(Smt) Vs. Vanka Venkata Reddy & Ors. decided on

20.04.1993.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments

advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that

petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation. Investigating

Officer had procured the warrant under Section 37 of Police Act.

Custodial interrogation is also required. So, looking to the gravity

of offence, the anticipatory bail application be dismissed.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

It is an admitted position that petitioner is not cooperating in

the investigation. Investigating Officer had procured the warrant

under Section 37 of Police Act against the petitioner. Custodial

interrogation is also required. So, looking to the gravity of offence,

I do not consider it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on

anticipatory bail.

Hence, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Jatin/101

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)