Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1992 DIGILAW 225 (RAJ)

Ramphool v. State of Rajasthan

1992-02-28

N.L.TIBREWAL

body1992
JUDGMENT 1. - In an incident, which took place on 1-10-1991 two cross reports were registered at police station Ravanjna Doongar Distt. ,Sawai Madhopur. As per the prosecution case, as given-out in the report, the incident took place on the chabootra of the temple where it is alleged that the members of the accused party assaulted and snatched chain etc., while as per the ease of the accused party, the incident look place in their field where the members of the Complainant party assaulted to them causing injuries to as many as 6-7 persons. 2. I have seen the case diary and perused the site plan which has been prepared by the Investigating Officer, in the case against (he accused-persons. From the said site plan, it does not appear that the incident took place on the chabootra of the temple as alleged by the Complainant party in his report. 3. After taking into consideration the number of injuries sustained by the members of the accused-party and the place of incident, I am of the view that the interim order passed by this Court in favour of the petitioner on Dec. 20..1.1991 be made absolute and he should be given the benefit of pre-arrest bail under section-438 Criminal Procedure Code. 4. The SHO/Arresting Officer, Investigating Officer, Police Station Rayanjna Doongar in F.I.R. No. .106/91 is therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner-Ramphool S/o Bajranga he be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. five thousand only) with one surety in the like sum to his satisfaction on the fallowing conditions:- (a) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (b) 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 him from disclosing such facts as to the court, or to any other police officer; and (c) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. *******