Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sita Devi vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 6589 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6589 Raj
Judgement Date : 29 August, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sita Devi vs State Of Rajasthan on 29 August, 2023
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9714/2023

Sita Devi W/o Hema Ram, Aged About 42 Years, Mod Bhatta, Sojat City, P.s. Sojat City, Dist. Pali (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dilip Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Kumar, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

29/08/2023

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the

petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR

No.417/2022, registered at Police Station Sojat City, District Pali,

for the offences punishable under Sections 376-D, 384, 120-B of

IPC and under Section 67 of the I.T. Act.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that co-accused-Hema Ram S/o Moola Ram has already been

enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.01.2023

(S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.393/2023). Learned

counsel submitted that the allegation of sexual assault was

against co-accused Hema Ram who has already been enlarged on

bail. The petitioner is a lady who is not at all involved in

commission of alleged offence and therefore, no useful purpose

would be served by sending her behind the bars. Learned counsel

further submitted that no recovery is due to be effected from the

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-9714/2023]

present petitioner and custodial interrogation of the petitioner in

the present case is not necessary. Looking to the accusation

levelled against the petitioner in the FIR, the benefit of bail may

be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the

prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that charge-sheet

against the present petitioner has already been filed and

therefore, the present anticipatory bail filed under Section 438

Cr.P.C. is not maintainable.

In rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

object of Section 438 Cr.P.C. is to prevent undue harassment to

the accused petitioner by pre-trial arrest and detention.

Learned counsel further submitted that the powers under

Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be exercised even if the charge-sheet has

been filed, if the Court comes to the conclusion that custodial

interrogation is not at all necessitated. Reliance was placed on the

judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat

Choudhary & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. reported in (2003) 8

SCC 77.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and

upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar so

also the fact that the co-accused-Hema Ram against whom

specific allegation of sexual assault was levelled has already been

enlarged on regular bail by this Court, this Court prima facie is of

the opinion that custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-9714/2023]

not at all necessitated and it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory

bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioner-Sita Devi W/o Hema

Ram, in connection with FIR No.417/2022, registered at Police

Station Sojat City, District Pali, she shall be released on bail;

provided to furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

each along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the

satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the

following conditions :-

(i). that the petitioner shall make herself 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.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 171-KshamaD/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter