Allowed

Sunita Devi W/O Ramnarayan Sain v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Mar 2024CRLMB/1445/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan granted anticipatory bail to two female petitioners facing involvement in a criminal case alleging instigation and assault. The court relied on the lack of specific overt-acts against them and their status as family members of co-accused without commenting on the case on merits, directing release contingent upon a bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each subject to specified conditions.

Sunita Devi W/O Ramnarayan Sain Vs the State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:12650]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1445/2024

¶4

Sunita Devi W/o Ramnarayan Sain, Aged About 38 Years

¶5

Sampati Devi W/o Gopal Sain, Aged About 45 Years, Both are R/o Village Bisau, Post Chandama Kalan, P.S. Madhorajpura, Distt. Jaipur Raj.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

13/03/2024

¶14

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No.1/2024, Police Station Madhorajpura, District Jaipur Rural for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 504, 506 and 379 of IPC (later on, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 504, 506, 325 and 308 IPC).

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that general omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. Counsel submits that the instant case is a case of over implication and the entire family members have been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that custodial arrest of the petitioners is not required. Counsel submits that no

[2024:RJ-JP:12650]

[CRLMB-1445/2024]

(2 of 3)

specific overt-act has been assigned to the petitioners and the petitioners are female members of the family, therefore, indulgence of anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioners.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by the counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that that no specific overt-act has been assigned to the petitioners and also looking to the fact that the petitioners are female and they belong to the family of the co-accused against whom specific overt-act has been assigned and without making any comment on merits and demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners 1.Sunita

¶23

Devi W/o Ramnarayan Sain & 2. Sampati Devi W/o

¶24

Gopal Sain , in connection with FIR No.1/2024, Police Station Madhorajpura, District Jaipur Rural, the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-

¶25

(i). that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:12650]

[CRLMB-1445/2024]

(ii). that the petitioners 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 petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶31

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶32

MR/466

Sunita Devi W/O Ramnarayan Sain v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita Devi W/O Ramnarayan Sain v. the 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

Hemendra Rana S/O Shri Pradyuman Kumar Rana Vs Deepak Kapoor Son of Late. Mr. Hriday Narayan Kapoor

Neha Tyagi D/O Vinod Kumar Tyagi Vs the Union of India

Sarita Kumari Dudi Wife of Shri Arvind Kumar Vs District Magistrate

Bharat Ratna Son of Shri Bal Krishan Chorasiya Vs Municipal Board Chirawa

Gopal Sain S/O Jagannath Sain Vs the State of Rajasthan

Mool Chand and Ors. Vs B O R and Ors.