Partly allowed

Mukesh Meena v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC21 Mar 2018CRLMP/408/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan entertained four connected criminal miscellaneous petitions challenging proceedings under Section 498-A and 406 IPC regarding alleged dowry harassment. The court dismissed petitions by Mukesh, Ramjilal, and Santosh Devi Meena, exempting them from personal appearance subject to specific bond conditions for trial stage attendance. Rakesh Meena's petition was stayed pendin

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Meena dismissed with liberty to argue; Ramjilal, Santosh Devi Meena dismissed with liberty to argue and exemption from personal appearance subject to undertaking to appear at charge framing and

Mukesh Meena Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 408/2016

Mukesh Meena

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan And Anr

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 409/2016 Ramjilal Meena

¶10

----Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan And Anr

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 410/2016

¶15

Smt Santosh Devi Meena

¶16

----Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Rajasthan And Anr

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 411/2016

Rakesh Meena

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan And Anr

¶25

----Respondents

¶26

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gurvinder Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakad, PP

¶27

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

¶28

Order

¶29

21/03/2018

¶30

Mukesh Meena was married with Smt. Jyoti as per Hindu Customs and Rites.

¶31

(2 of 4) [CRLMP-408/2016]

¶32

Mr. Gurvinder Singh has submitted that marriage was solemnized on 16.02.2010. Counsel for the petitioners has contended that respondent-wife lodged FIR No.277/2013 against her husband Mukesh Meena, father in law-Ramjilal Meena, mother in law-Smt. Santosh Devi Meena and brother in law(Devar)Rakesh Meena. In the said FIR Investiating Officer has submitted a final report in negative form, thereafter, complainant had filed a protest petition and thereupon the court of Judicial Metropolitan Magistrate No.20, Jaipur had taken cognizance of offences under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC against husband Mukesh Meena, father in law-Ramjilal Meena, mother in law-Smt. Santosh Devi Meena and brother in law(Devar)-Rakesh Meena.

¶33

A perusal of the impugned FIR reveals that specific allegations have been leveled against the petitioners i.e. husband Mukesh Meena, father in law-Ramjilal Meena, mother in law-Smt. Santosh Devi Meena.

¶34

After hearing counsel for the petitioners, S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.408/16 preferred by Mukesh Meena is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner-Mukesh Meena to raise all arguments before the trial court at appropriate stage.

¶35

Similarly, S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.409/2016 preferred by Ramjilal Meena and S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.410/2016 instituted by Smt. Santosh Devi Meena are also dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to raise all arguments available to them before the trial court, however, considering relationship and age of Ramjilal and Smt. Santosh Devi Meena, their presence before the trial court is exempted, subject to following conditions:-

¶36

[CRLMP-408/2016]

¶37

(3 of 4)

¶38

(a) That the petitioners shall file an undertaking before the trial court that they shall appear before the trial court at the time of framing of charge, recording of evidence and statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶39

(b) That in the undertaking filed the petitioners shall specifically state that any evidence recorded in their absence, but in presence of their counsel, shall be binding upon them.

¶40

(c) That the accused-petitioners shall also undertake to appear before the trial court as and when called by the trial Judge.

¶41

(d) That upon appearance of the petitioners, the trial court shall accept personal bonds and bonds to be submitted by the sureties, and same shall enure during the pendency of the trial.

¶42

So far Rakesh Meena-brother in law is concerned, it is submitted that he is victim of false implication.

¶43

Relying upon Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand & Anr., AIR 2010(SC) 3363 , it is contended that unnecessarily all members of family have been involved in the present case.

¶44

Issue notice to the respondents for 21.05.2018. Till then, further proceedings against Rakesh Meena-petitioner to S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.411/2016, shall remain stayed.

¶45

Consequently, S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.408/2016 preferred by Mukesh Meena vs State of Rajasthan & Anr., is dismissed. S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.409/2016 instituted by Ramjilal Meena vs State of Rajasthan & Anr and S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.410/2016 filed by Smt. Santosh Devi Meena vs State of Rajasthan & Anr are also dismissed by exempting their personal appearance before the trial court, as per the conditions specified.

¶46

[CRLMP-408/2016]

¶47

(4 of 4)

¶48

List S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.411/2016 preferred by Rakesh Meena vs State of Rajasthan & Anr on 21.05.2018.

¶49

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J

¶50

Heena

Mukesh Meena v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Meena v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saroj Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Gouri Shankar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Hemraj Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rameshwar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Kamal Singh and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Ramesh Chand Sharma Vs Ms Rekha Gupta