Asru and Others vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Rafiq, J.—Heard learned Counsel for petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor for State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

Contention of the learned Counsel for petitioners is that petitioners have been named only with a view to falsely implicate them. Otherwise, there is cross-case between the parties. While two persons from the side of the accused Pappu and Jasi have sustained fire-arm injuries, there was only one injured on the side of the complainant Akbar, who also received fire-arm injury and in the FIR specific role that has been assigned to the petitioners is pelting stones at the house of the complainant but no one had sustained injuries due to pelting of stones. Jakar has not been assigned any specific role and only omnibus allegation has been made against him. Two accused namely; Pappu and Jafru, who have been assigned specific role have already been enlarged on bail u/s 439 Cr.P.C. Police has not believed the allegation that the incident took place in the house of the complainant, on the contrary, as per case of the petitioners, accused-party, complainant- party was aggressor as they came to attack accused-party. Police has not found any case u/s 452 IPC against any of the petitioners.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

Having regard to the facts aforesaid and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on pre-arrest bail.

In the result, this anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the of arrest of petitioners (1) Asru S/o Kamal Khan, (2) Isrial S/o Jumma and (3) Jakar S/o Fajru in FIR No. 30/2010 PS Baroda Mev, District Alwar for offence Under Sections 143, 323, 336 and 307 IPC, they be released by the SHO/IO on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each to his satisfaction with the following conditions:

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

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

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