Allowed

Reeta Bhati v. State

Rajasthan HC1 Jun 2017CRLMB/4813/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 4813/2017 and connected petitions, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan granted bail to medical practitioners charged with maintaining false cases under Section 18 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The holding mandates furnishing and persuing prosecution as a condition for bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioners Reeta Bhati and Dr. Shyam Sunder Goyal to furnish and persevere prosecution as directed.

Reeta Bhati Vs State — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 4813 / 2017

¶3

Reeta Bhati Wife of Shri Omprakash Bhati, By Caste Bhat, Resident of C/o Ghanshyam Das, Ward No. 09, Bhatta Colony, Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh (At Present Lodged in Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar)

----Petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan

----Respondent

Connected With

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 4596 / 2017 Dr. Shyam Sunder Goyal S/o Sh. Ashok Goyal, By Caste Agarwal, Resident of Bombay CT-Scan, Bhathinda Road, Muktsar Punjab, Presently Director and Sonologist, Bombay CT-Scan, Bhatinda, Road, Muktsar, (Punjab)(Presently Lodged in Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar)

¶10

Versus

¶11

State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor

¶12

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& izkFkhZx.k dh vksj ls vf/koDrk Jh fouhr tSu] Jh Mh ds xkSM+] yksd vfHk;kstd Jh , ,l jkBkSM+] mifLFkrA

¶13

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& ekuuh; U;k;kf/kifr Jh lnhi ea sgrk fu.kZ;

¶14

01@06@2017

¶15

izkFkhZx.k dh vksj ls ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= vUrxZr /kkjk 439 n.M izfØ;k lafgrk

¶16

iqfylFkkuk ihchvkbZ fpfdRlk ,oa LokLF; lsok,a jkt- t;iqj esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ

¶17

la[;k 18@2017 vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 4] 5] 5¼2½] 6] 23 o 25 ihlhih,uMhVh vf/kfu;e

¶18

1994 o /kkjk 315@511 420 o 120ch Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds ekeys esa mUgsa tekur ij fjgk fd;s tkus gsrq izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[CRLMB-4813/2017]

¶21

izkFkhZx.k ds vf/koDrk }kjk izkFkhZx.k dks tekur ij fjgk fd, tkus dk fuosnu fd;k x;kA fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd us iqjtksj fojks/k dj tekur izkFkZuk i= fujLr fd, tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA

¶22

lquk x;kA i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA bl U;k;ky; dh jk; esa izkFkhZx.k dks tekur ij fjgk fd, tkus ds mfpr vk/kkj i=koyh ij ekStwn gSaA

¶23

rnuqlkj] izdj.k ds xq.kkoxq.k ij fcuk fVIi.kh fd, ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS vkSj vkns’k fn;k tkrk gS fd ;fn izkFkhZ 1- jhVk HkkVh] 2- MkW- ‘;ke lqUnj xks;y iqfylFkkuk ihchvkbZ fpfdRlk ,oa LokLF; lsok,a jkt- t;iqj esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 18@2017] ds ekeys esa ;ksX; fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds lUrks”kizn] muds U;k;ky; esa fu;r frfFk;ksa ij ,oa tc Hkh mUgsa cqyk;k tkos] mifLFkfr gsrq] izR;sd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ipkl&ipkl gtkj :i, dk cU/ki= ,oa iphl&iphl gtkj :i, dh nks izfrHkwfr;ka izLrqr djs] rks mUgsa tekur ij fjgk dj fn;k tk,A

¶24

bl vkns’k dh izfr l a ca) i=koyh esa yxkbZ tk,A

¶25

¼lanhi esgrk½ U;k;kf/kifr

¶26

,l-,u-yksgjk@163&164

Reeta Bhati v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reeta Bhati v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases