Allowed

Kamleshi W/O Premchand v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Feb 2024CRLMB/165/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Woman apprehending arrest for IPC offences including attempt to murder sought anticipatory bail. Main injury allegations were against two co-accused already enlarged on regular bail, no specific allegation of causing injuries against the petitioner, and a cross FIR existed. Anticipatory bail was allowed subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail upon arrest on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to conditions.

Kamleshi W/O Premchand Vs the State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:7456]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 165/2024

¶4

Kamleshi W/o Premchand, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ojhapura, Police Station Todaraisingh, District Kekri (Raj.).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Asgar Khan
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Mahendra Meena, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

13/02/2024

¶13

Apprehending the arrest in connection with FIR No.351/2023 registered at Police Station Todaraisingh, District Kekri for the offence(s) under Sections 143, 448, 323 and 307 of I.P.C., the petitioner has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated under Sections 341, 323, 307 and 34 of I.P.C. He also submits that the specific allegation of causing injuries to injured Dinesh and Balu are against the co-accused Prem and Ramdev. 3. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner further submits that accused party also sustained injury and they have filed the cross FIR against complainant party. He also submits that coaccused Prem and Ramdev have already been enlarged on regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the concerned A.D.J. The

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:7456]

[CRLMB-165/2024]

custodial investigation of accused-petitioner is not required. The accused-petitioner is a lady, therefore, the anticipatory bail of accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application.

¶20

I have considered the fact that main allegations of causing injuries to injured Dinesh and Balu are against the co-accused Prem and Ramdev and they have already been enlarged on bail by the concerned A.D.J. There is no specific version against the present petitioner causing any injury to injured Dinesh and Balu. Further a cross case has already been instituted by the accused party against the complainant and other persons. It is not desirable to express anything on the merit/demerit of the case, so also, the fact that custodial investigation of accused-petitioner is not required, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner.

¶21

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- Kamleshi W/o Premchand, in connection with FIR No.351/2023 registered at Police Station Todaraisingh, District Kekri, she shall be released on bail, 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 S.H.O/I.O/Arresting OfÏcer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶22

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

¶23

(ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:7456]

[CRLMB-165/2024]

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 ofÏcer, and

¶28

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

¶29

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶30

154-SURAJ KUMAR

Kamleshi W/O Premchand v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamleshi W/O Premchand 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

Aditya @ Bhupendra @ Guddu S/O Mr. Gyan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sahdev Gurjar S/O Sundaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Kumar S/O Late Shri Tarachand Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkesh S/O Latoor Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammed Shareef S/O Mohammed Haneef Vs State of Rajasthan

Sharavan Kumar S/O Shri Ramchandra Vs State of Rajasthan