This judgment dismisses an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 CrPC. The court found it unjust and improper to grant bail based on the nature of allegations and injury sustained by the victim.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12460/2014
Satveer Vs. State of Rajasthan
DATE: 1st December, 2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. MATHUR
Mr. Lalit Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, Public Prosecutor.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
case diary.
The petitioner has filed a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with FIR No.375/2014 registered at Police Station Pragpura, District Jaipur for the offence under Sections 143, 341, 323, 452, 427 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code in which Sections 336 and 326 IPC were added.
Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of allegations in the FIR, material available on the record against the petitioner and the nature of injury of the injured Smt. Manoj, I do not find it just and proper to extend the protection of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner is hereby rejected.
(V.K. MATHUR),J.
Brijesh, 82.
“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.”
BRIJESH KUMAR SHARMA JUNIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to extend anticipatory bail protection to the petitioner in the present case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satveer
State of Rajasthan
V.K. MATHUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
