Allowed

Smt Shyama Devi and Anr. v. State

Rajasthan HC7 May 2018CRLMB/3578/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners facing charges under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC, directing them to execute a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner to furnish personal bond of Rs.80,000 with sureties of Rs.40,000 each on conditions of appearance, not influencing witnesses, and not leaving India.

Smt Shyama Devi and Anr. Vs State — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 3578 / 2018

¶3

Smt Shyama Devi W/o Shri Devendra Kumar Chaubey, Aged About 53 Years

¶4

Devendra Kumar Chaubey S/o Lt. Shri Sukh Sagar Chaubey, Aged About 57 Years, By Caste Brahman, R/o 1.5 F, Near Natnia Dai Temple, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus The State of Rajasthan

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Subodh Jangid

¶9

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Avasthi, PP

¶10

For Complainant : Mr. Haider Agha

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

07/05/2018

¶14

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with FIR No.28/2018 of Police Station Mahila Thana, West Jodhpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 of IPC.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant and no specific averment has been made by the complainant. Therefore no useful purpose will be served in sending the petitioner behind the bars. Therefore, petitioners may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CRLMB-3578/2018]

¶20

Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶22

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners 1. Smt Shyama Devi W/o Shri Devendra Kumar Chaubey, 2. Devendra Kumar Chaubey S/o Lt. Shri Sukh Sagar Chaubey, in connection with FIR No.28/2018 of Police Station Mahila Thana, West Jodhpur, they shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.80,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureities of Rs.40,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./S.H.O. on the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) They shall make themselves available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required;

¶24

(ii) They 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 to any Police Officer;

¶25

(iii) They shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶26

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J.

¶27

Amit/64

Smt Shyama Devi and Anr. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Shyama Devi and Anr. 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

Mohanlal Vs State

Ashok Singh and Ors. Vs State

Rawta Ram Vs State

Hanuman Ram Vs State

Manish Prasad Vs State

Mangi Lal Vs State