Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1992 DIGILAW 166 (RAJ)

Chhotu v. State of Rajasthan

1992-02-11

V.S.DAVE

body1992
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the bail application. 2. There are cross-cases where both the parties sustained injuries. It is not made clear in the statements of the witnesses that who is the author of the grievous injury sustained by Sheoji and ominous statement has been given. Chhotu, has been attributed to have caused injury by sharp edged weapon. Conspicuously, there is no injury by sharp edged weapon. 3. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I consider it just and proper to grant anticipatory bait, to the accused petitioners. 4. The S.H.O./Arresting Officer/I.O Police Station Gaigal, Distt. Ajmer, in F.I.R. No. 129/1991, is therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Chtotu S/o Bhagirath. Bhairu s/o Bhagirath, Hari Ram son of Shri Bhiyan, Ramlal son of Bhiyan, Mana son of Bhiyan, Pema son of Bhiyan, Umrao son of Bhiyan, Jairam son of Gordhan, Shoraj son of Gordhan. Golu son of Gordhan, Pratap son of Gordhan, Gopal son of Gordhan, Kana son of Moola, Bhanwarlal son of Moola, and Gordhan son of Harlal, all by caste Jat, r/o Village Jatil, Distt. Ajmer, shall be released on pre-arrest bail, provided each one of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000/- together with one surety in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions:- 1. that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer, as and when required; 2. 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 3. that the petitioners shall not leave India, without the previous permission of the Court. Anticipatory bail granted. *******