Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kamal Kishore Ghusar vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:10465) on 26 February, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:10465] (1 of 5) [CRLMP-7756/2023]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 7756/2023
1. Kamal Kishore Ghusar S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar, Aged About
31 Years, R/o Near Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti,
Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka Than, Jodhpur.
2. Shobha W/o Kailash Pandit, Aged About 48 Years, R/o
Near Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka
Than, Jodhpur.
3. Saroj W/o Sharwan Teji, Aged About 46 Years, R/o 10,
Number Kothi Manju Colony, Near Zila Parishad Bikaner.
4. Ashok Kumar S/o Manak Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Near Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka
Than, Jodhpur.
5. Malti W/o Ashok Kumar, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Harijan
Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka Than, Jodhpur.
6. Karan S/o Ashok Kumar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Near
Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka
Than, Jodhpur.
7. Bhanu S/o Ashok Kumar, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Near
Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka
Than, Jodhpur.
8. Kamla W/o Manak Ram, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Near
Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka
Than, Jodhpur.
9. Manak Ram S/o Jassa Ram, Aged About 80 Years, R/o
Near Shimbhu Mandir, Harijan Basti, Bhadwasiya, Mata Ka
Than, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Seema Dharu W/o Kamal Kishore, R/o Gali No. 1,
Ashok Colony, Mata Ka Than, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Panwar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, P.P.
(Downloaded on 08/03/2024 at 08:56:43 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:10465] (2 of 5) [CRLMP-7756/2023]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
26/02/2024
1. After arguing to some extent, learned counsel for the
petitioners seeks withdrawal of the instant criminal misc. petition
to the extent of petitioner No.1- Kamal Kishore Ghusar while
reserving his rights to argue for rest of the petitioners.
2. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is disposed of
as withdrawn to the extent of the petitioner No.1- Kamal Kishore
Ghusar.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public
Prosecutor as well as gone through the material as made
available to this Court.
4. It is revealing that the marriage got solemnized on
22.02.2016 and after a considerable long time, the dispute arose
between the couple upon which the respondent No.2 (wife of the
petitioner No.1) lodged an FIR on 22.09.2023 against the
petitioners, for which, no specific role has been attributed in the
FIR. Otherwise also, it is a strife in between the couple and the
case is exclusively triable by a Court of Magistrate for which
Sections 41 and 41A Cr.PC. as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble
the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of
Bihar [AIR 2014 SC 2756] applies squarely in the present case.
5. Consequently, this Court deems it appropriate to direct that
during the course of entire investigation, the petitioners Nos.2 to 9
shall not be arrested in connection with FIR No.156/2023
registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jodhpur City
East and in the event, any offences are found proved against
[2024:RJ-JD:10465] (3 of 5) [CRLMP-7756/2023]
them, then instead of affecting arrest, they shall be given a prior
notice of 15 days to appear before the Court where the charge-
sheet would be submitted.
7. On the day of filing of the charge-sheet, the petitioners shall
move a regular bail application. Upon moving of the bail
application, the learned trial Court shall release them on bail on
the very same day; on the amount of surety and bonds as he
deems fit.
8. Accordingly, the instant misc. petition is disposed of.
9. Stay petition also stands disposed of.
10. Needless to say that nothing will preclude the petitioners to
agitate their matters before the learned trial Court on the merits
of the case.
(FARJAND ALI),J
212-Ravi Khandelwal
[2024:RJ-JD:10465] (4 of 5) [CRLMP-7756/2023]
1. After arguing at some extent, learned counsel seeks
withdrawal of the petitioner to the extent of petitioner No.1-
Kamal while reserving his rights to argue for rest of the
petitioners.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public
Prosecutor gone through the material available on record.
3. It is revealing that they solemnized marriage on 22.02.2016
and after a considerable long time. The dispute arose spouces and
the lady lodged the FIR on 22.09.2023. The petitioners and are
other family member of the victim for which no specific role has
been attributed in the FIR otherwise also its strife in between the
spouces and the case of exclusively triable by Magistrate for which
Sections 41 and 41 A Cr.P.C. as well as the judgment passed by
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar applies
squarely in the present case.
Consequently, this Court deems it appropriate to direct that
during the course of entire investigation, the petitioners Nos.2 to 9
shall not be arrested in connection with FIR No.156/2023
registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jodhpur City
East. Charge-sheet would be required to file any against one of
them instead of assisting himself present before this Court where
charge-sheet would charge upon filing charge-sheet on behalf of
the petitioners No.2 to 9.
[2024:RJ-JD:10465] (5 of 5) [CRLMP-7756/2023]
The trial court released on bail on the very same day as the
learned trial court deems it appropriate, nothing precludes from
the petitioners to agitate their matter before the trial court on
merits of the case.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
