Single judge order allowing anticipatory bail to the petitioner in an FIR involving theft and forest contraventions. No opinion expressed on merits.
Petitioner released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions of joining investigation, not leaving India without permission and not tampering with evidence.
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.
(1 of 2)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS BAIL NO. 15566/2017
Sakawat S/o Shri Ramjan B/c Mev, R/o Sirohi Tehsil & District Faridabad, Haryana.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr. Hanish Khan For Respondent : Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, P.P.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Order
17/11/2017
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No.129/2016 registered at Police Station Chopanki, District Alwar for offence under Sections 379, 120-B Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 29, 32, 33, 41, 42 of The Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle-in-question and was having a valid Ravanna at the time of the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record photo-copy of the Ravanna . Learned counsel has submitted that petitioner had moved a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking direction to the Investigating Agency to inquire into the Ravanna issued in his favour and the said
(2 of 2)
petition was disposed of by this court vide order dated 9.11.2016. Petitioner is ready to join investigation.
Learned State Counsel on the other hand, has opposed the petition.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to order the release of the petitioner on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this petition is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioner be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. Petitioner shall join investigation as and when required by the police and shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(SABINA)J.
Mohita/13
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the facts of this case.
What conditions the petitioner must satisfy while on bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Sakawat
State of Rajasthan
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
