Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Raghuveer vs State on 8 November, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2633/2022
Raghuveer S/o Shri Banshi Lal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Aogala, Police Station Sedva, Tehsil Sedva, District Barmer (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Bagmalani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, AGA
For Complainant : Mr. Rameshwar Dave
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
08/11/2023
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of
filing an application under Section 438 CrPC at the instance of
accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are
tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case
1. FIR Number 43/2022
2. Concerned Police Station Dhorimanna
3. District Barmer
4. Offences alleged in the FIR Sections 452, 341, 323 and
34 of the IPC
5. Offences added, if any Sections 307, 324 of the IPC
6. Date of passing of 14.02.2022
impugned order
2. Having apprehension of being arrested in the afore-
mentioned matter, the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail
on the ground that no case for the alleged offences is made out
against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-2633/2022]
factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of
anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made
an accused based on conjectures and surmises.
4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the
petitioner, 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.
6. The parties belongs to a common descendant and an interim
order was passed in favour of the petitioner on 02.08.2022
restraining his arrest in the present case, whereafter around two
and one year has lapsed and the petitioner is enjoying the said
protection since then and he has not misused the liberty during
this prolonged 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 petitioner in the present matter.
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
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2633/2022]
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
(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India
without previous permission of the court.
(FARJAND ALI),J
269-divya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
