Allowed

Kiran Devi W/O Udaiveer v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Dec 2021CRLMB/18504/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Jugali Devi under Section 438 Cr.P.C., granting bail subject to a bond and specific conditions, while explicitly refraining from expressing an opinion on the merits of the underlying case.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each on the specified conditions.

Kiran Devi W/O Udaiveer Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 18504/2021

¶3

Jugali Devi W/o Ramchandra, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Dhani Karmari Tan Pupurana P.S. Khetri Tehsil Khetri Dist Jhunjhunu Raj.

¶4

----Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, PP Mr. Ramit Pareek for complainant through VC

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶9

Order

¶10

13/12/2021

¶11

This bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR 0070/2021 registered at P.S. Khetri, Distt. Jhunjhunu for the offences mentioned therein against the petitioner, whereupon the investigation was commenced. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner moved the bail application before the court below, which was dismissed. Hence, this bail application has been filed.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel appearing for the complainant and perused the material made available on record.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady, she has been falsely implicated in the present case as she has nothing to do with the alleged incident. There is

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CRLMB-18504/2021]

¶16

no specific allegation in the FIR against the present accused petitioner. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not at all required. Hence, the petitioner be enlarged on bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶17

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel appearing for the complainant have opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that there is specific allegation in the FIR against the accused petitioner Jugali Devi. The accused petitioner inflicted injuries to the injured in the presence of Police.

¶18

Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for petitioner, note of the allegations levelled against the petitioner as also looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Therefore, this bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Jugali Devi W/o Ramchandra in the aforesaid FIR, she shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer, provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the SHO/IO of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:

¶20

i) That the petitioner/s shall make himself/herself/themselves available for interrogation before the police officer, as and when required;

¶21

ii) That the petitioner/s shall 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/her/them from

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

[CRLMB-18504/2021]

¶24

disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶25

iii) That the petitioner/s shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶26

iv) That the petitioner/s shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she/they is/are accused or suspected.

¶27

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶28

Ritu/36

Kiran Devi W/O Udaiveer v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Devi W/O Udaiveer v. State of Rajasthan

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

Jairam S/O Late Ramswroop Vs State of Rajasthan

New India Assurnce Co. Ltd. Vs Shambhu Sav and Ors.

Omprakash @ Banti S/O Lal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemabai @ Hemlata W/O Harishankar D/O Banshilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Babu Lal Gurjar Son of Moti Lal Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Kumar Gurjar S/O Kanaram Gujar Vs State of Rajasthan