Allowed

Smt Ghisi Bai W/O Raju v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2024CRLMB/488/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a Section 438 Cr.P.C. anticipatory bail application filed by two female petitioners. The court considered their status as females, lack of specific allegations against them, and regular bail granted to a co-accused, deeming it proper to grant the application without expressing an opinion on the case merits.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed. Petitioners directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Smt Ghisi Bai W/O Raju Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:5654]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 488/2024

¶4

Smt Ghisi Bai W/o Raju, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Mandana Ki Dhani District Kota, Rajasthan.

¶5

Smt. Khelan Bai W/o Bagami, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Mandana Ki Dhani District Kota, Rajasthan.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan Ms. Simran Bharti For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.K. Sheoran, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶12

Order

¶13

02/02/2024

¶14

The instant pre-arrest bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who are having apprehension of their arrest in connection with FIR No.200/2023 registered at Police Station Mandana, District Kota (Rural) for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 326 & 308 of IPC.

¶15

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submit that petitioners are females and there is no specific allegation against them. Allegation of causing grievous injury is against co-accused Mahendra Raibari, whose bail has

[2024:RJ-JP:5654]

[CRLMB-488/2024]

(2 of 3)

already been dismissed by this Court. It is further submitted that other co-accused Raju has been granted regular bail by this Court. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required in this matter.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that petitioners are named in the FIR. 4. Considering the contentions put-forth by the counsel for the petitioners and taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, especially the fact that petitioners are females and co-accused Raju has been granted regular bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application.

¶21

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Mandana, District Kota (Rural) in FIR No.200/2023 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners – (1) Smt Ghisi Bai W/o Raju, (2) Smt. Khelan Bai W/o Bagami, they shall be released on bail, provided each of them 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 Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶22

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

¶23

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

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:5654]

[CRLMB-488/2024]

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 officer, and

¶28

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

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

CHARU SONI /38

Smt Ghisi Bai W/O Raju v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Ghisi Bai W/O Raju 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

M/S Kalyan Motors Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajesh Sharma S/O Shri Prabhudayal Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Jyoti Kumari Khatik D/O Sh. Nangiya Khatik, W/O Rajesh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sakshi Kumbhkar D/O Durga Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Manish @ Mani S/O Shri Lalaram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Maya Kholiya D/O Jagdish Narayan Kholiya W/O Krishan Kumar, Vs State of Rajasthan