Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court Bench at Jaipur dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by two petitioners charged with offences including assault and criminal intimidation, finding it improper to grant bail without expressing an opinion on merits.
Anticipatory bail application dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP Mr. Omveer Singh Saini, for complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
22/03/2022
This bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.189/2021 registered at Police Station Udaipurwati, Jhunjhunu for the offences under sections 143, 341, 323, 325, 506 & 308 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a cross FIR No.192/2021 has also been filed by Chhajuram, father of the petitioner No.2. The alleged offences are not made out against the petitioners. Petitioners have no criminal antencedents. Hence, the anticipatory bail application may kindly be granted.
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-485/2022]
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor as also the
learned counsel for the complainant have strongly opposed the bail application.
As per FIR, petitioners Sunil Kumar and Rahul with another co-accused inflicted injuries on Prem Devi and Sajana Devi & complainant Puran Chand with iron rod and gandasi. As per injury report of Puran Chand, he got 3 injuries and all are simple in nature. As per injury report of Prem Devi, she got 7 injuries and injury No.3, 4 & 7 are grievous in nature. As per injury report of Sajana Devi, she got one injury which is simple in nature.
Therefore, taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the complainant and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and also the grevity of the offences but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it not proper to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J
CHARU/58
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners charged under sections 143, 341, 323, 325, 506 and 308 of IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunil Kumar S/o Bhomaram
Rahul S/o Chhajuram
State Of Rajasthan
Chandra Kumar Songara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
