Allowed

Kailash S/O Nathuram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC31 May 2024CRLMB/16382/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipated concludes an order allowing anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court noted that custodial interrogation is not required. Bail was granted subject to furnishing a bond and adhering to standard conditions including appearing for interrogation and not leaving India without permission.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner to be released on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to conditions.

Kailash S/O Nathuram Vs State of Rajasthan — Corruption | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:26222]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16382/2023

¶4

Kailash S/o Nathuram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Bijathal, Tehsil Riyabadi, District Nagour (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Naman Yadav
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. C. G. Chopra-PP
	Mr. Amra Ram, HC/1518
	Police Station Pushkar,District Ajmer

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

31/05/2024

¶13

Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.240/2023 registered at Police Station Pushkar, District Ajmer for the offence(s) under Sections 379 and 353 of IPC and Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, the petitioner has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The main allegation of illegally transporting the sand is against the other coaccused Manohar. The petitioner is not involved in illegally transporting the sand. He further submits that custodial investigation of the accused petitioner is not required, therefore, the anticipatory bail of accused-petitioner may be allowed.

[2024:RJ-JP:26222]

[CRLMB-16382/2023]

(2 of 2)

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application.

¶19

Mr. Amra Ram, HC/1518, Police Station Pushkar, District Ajmer present in person before the Court and concedes that custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioner is not required.

¶20

I have considered the overall allegations levelled in the FIR and contentions made by the counsel for the parties.

¶21

Considering the above facts, without expressing anything on merits/demerits of the case and looking to the fact that custodial investigation of the present petitioner is not required, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner.

¶22

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner- Kailash S/o Nathuram, in connection with FIR No.240/2023 registered at Police Station Pushkar, District Ajmer, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶24

(ii) that the petitioner 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

¶25

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

¶26

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶27

239-Rahul Joshi

Kailash S/O Nathuram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash S/O Nathuram 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

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Satbeer S/O Mathura Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Ravi Soni S/O Shri Shyam Sunder Soni Vs Union of India

Mohd. Imran Khan S/O Chotu Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil S/O Motilal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Subhash S/O Umrao Vs State of Rajasthan