High CourtsSingle Bench

Rakesh vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 18 October 2022 · Citation: (2022) 10 RAJ CK 0030

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Garg, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 384 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5527 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

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

9 paragraphs · 284 words

Manoj Kumar Garg, J

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.48/2022 lodged at Police Station Parsoli, District Chittorgarh for the offence under Section 384 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that main accused has already been arrested and regular bail has already been granted. In such circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars for indefinite time. Thus, the petitioner may be released on anticipatory bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Rakesh S/o Nagjiram Gurjar, in connection with FIR No.48/2022 lodged at Police Station Parsoli, District Chittorgarh, the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-

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

(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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and

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