AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
15 paragraphs · 242 wordsVinit Kumar Mathur, J
Lawyers are not physically appearing in the Court in view of the unprecedented situation being faced by the country due to pandemic of novel corona
virus (COVID-19).
The present application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.238/2021, Police
Station Sadar, District Nagaur.
I have gone through the impugned order as well as pleading in the bail application.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the nature of accusation, the gravity of the offence, material on record in support thereof and taking into consideration the totality of
the facts and circumstances of the present case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to extend the benefit under
Section 438 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner. Accordingly, the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
However, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is ready to surrender before the concerned court, which may consider his bail
application on the same day.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice, it is directed that if the petitioner Ahmed Ali S/o
Sh. Mohd. Shaff surrenders before the trial Court on or before 29.01.2022 and files a bail application, the concerned trial Court shall consider his bail
application preferably on the same day in accordance with law.