Allowed

Saajid Son of Waheeda v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 May 2023CRLMB/90/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to two petitioners in a criminal case where specific allegations were absent and co-accused had already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Grante d anticipatory bail subject to personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, along with conditions of availability, non-interference, and no travel abroad without permission.

Saajid Son of Waheeda Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 89/2023

¶3

Kaasam Son Of Jameel, Resident Of Village Kathol Police Station Pahadi, District Bharatpur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 90/2023 Saajid Son Of Waheeda, Resident Of Village Kathol Police Station Pahadi, District Bharatpur.

¶10

----Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶13

----Respondent

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Pooja Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶16

Order

¶17

26/05/2023

¶18

Since both these bail applications arise out of same FIR hence both are decided by this common order.

¶19

These anticipatory bail applications have been filed by the petitioners apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.405/2021, registered with Police Station Pahadi District Bharatpur for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354, 336, 379 and 451 IPC.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner – Kaasam. Counsel further

¶21

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-89/2023]

¶22

submits that common general allegations have been levelled against the petitioner Saajid and co-accused Jameel and they inflicted injuries on the person of Mubeen. Counsel submits that indulgence of bail has already been granted to the co-accused Jameel and the case of the petitioner – Saajid is at par with him, so same indulgence of anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioners.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

¶25

Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that there is no allegation against the petitioner – Kasam and common general allegations have been levelled against the petitioner Saajid and co-accused Jameel and they inflicted injuries on the person of Mubeen and looking to the fact that Co-accused Jameel and Wajib have already been granted indulgence of anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is of the opinion to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, these bail applications are allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Kaasam S/o Jameel and Saajid son of Waheeda in connection with FIR No.405/2021 registered Police Station Pahadi, District Bharatpur the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-

¶26

[CRLMB-89/2023]

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

(i). that the petitioner/s shall make himself/herself/themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required

¶29

(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 from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and

¶30

(iii). that the petitioner/s shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶31

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶32

KuD/33-34

Saajid Son of Waheeda v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saajid Son of Waheeda 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

Bhanwar Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Govind Singh S/O Babu Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Saloni D/O Shri Kunjbihari Vs State of Rajasthan

Kaasam Son of Jameel Vs State of Rajasthan

Prakash Chand Jatav Vs State and Ors.

Rajendra Kumar Sharma Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd. a