Ajay Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9183 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 9183 Raj
Judgement Date : 6 November, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ajay Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 November, 2023

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2023:RJ-JD:38189]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14931/2022

1. Ajay Kumar S/o Heera Lal, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Borawad Ps Makrana Dist. Nagaur Raj.

2. Pawan Kuamr S/o Heera Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Borawad Ps Makrana Dist. Nagaur Raj.

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

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devilal R.Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharwan Kumar, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARZAND ALI

Order

06/11/2023

1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of

filing an application under Section 438 CrPC at the instance of

accused-petitioners. The requisite details of the matter are

tabulated herein below:

S.No.                           Particulars of the Case
     1.    FIR Number                              38/2021
     2.    Concerned Police Station                Makrana
     3.    District                                Nagaur
     4.    Offences alleged in the FIR             Sections 420, 467, 468, 471,
                                                   295, 296 and 297 IPC
     5.    Offences added, if any                  -
     6.    Date   of    passing                of 07.11.2022
           impugned order


2.        Having      apprehension       of    being      arrested    in   the   afore-

mentioned matter, the petitioners have prayed for anticipatory bail

on the ground that no case for the alleged offences is made out

[2023:RJ-JD:38189] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14931/2022]

against them and their incarceration is not warranted. There are

no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant

of anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioners and they have been

made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the

petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail

application and submit that the present case is not fit for grant of

anticipatory bail.

5. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties

and have perused the material available on record. The offences

involved in case are triable by a Court of Magistrate, for which the

provisions contained under Section 41 and 41A of the CrPC are

applicable mutatis mutandis and the judgment rendered by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of

Bihar [AIR 2014 SC 2756] applies squarely in the present case,

where custodial investigation would not be required.

6. An interim order was passed in favour of the petitioners on

19.01.2023 restraining their arrest in the present case, whereafter

around ten months have lapsed and the petitioners are enjoying

the said protection since then and they have not misused the

liberty during this period as no report in this regard has been

received by this court. Thus, in light of the judgment rendered by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhishek Kumar Vs.

State of Dehli (Criminal Appeal No.360/2022) reported in

2022/INSC/275, and considering the over all facts and

circumstances of the case, it is deemed suitable to grant the

benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in the present matter.

[2023:RJ-JD:38189] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14931/2022]

Needless to say, none of the observations made herein under shall

affect the rights of either of the parties during trial and this Court

refrains from commenting on the niceties of the matter.

7. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 438

Cr.P.C. is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the

concerned Police Station is directed that in the event of arrest of

any of the petitioner in connection with the FIR, details of which

have been given in tabular form above, he shall be released on

bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to

the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned

Police Station 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