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
8 paragraphs · 328 wordsManoj Kumar Garg, J
This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No. 164/2022, Police Station Banar, District Jodhpur for offences under Sections 457 and 354 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner has nothing to do with this crime and the independent witnesses have not corroborated the the story of prosecution. In these circumstances, no useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars for indefinite period. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.
According to the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., specific averment has been made against the petitioner and eyewitness Smt. Shanti Devi has also corroborated the story of prosecution.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and material available on record, in the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the statement of prosecutrix and eyewitness, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
It is well settled that the power exercisable under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is somewhat extraordinary in character and it is only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to otherwise misuse his liberty. It is also well settled that ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of investigation intended to secure several purposes and it may be necessary to curtail the freedom of an accused in order to enable the investigation to proceed without hindrance and prevent the disappearance of the accused.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.