Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 81 (RAJ)

Vimala v. State of Rajasthan

2004-01-19

HARBANS LAL

body2004
JUDGMENT 1. - This bail application u/s 438 Cr.RC. has been filed by petitioners Smt. Vimala and Narayandas Sawami who apprehend their arrest in FIR No. 7/02 F.S. Mahila Thana, District Ajmer wherein the investigation is pending for the offences u/s 498-A and 304-B, I.RC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that this false case has been foisted on them. The case was found false by the police on investigation and F.R. was submitted. On protest petition, the court has taken cognizance vide order dated 16.10.03 Deceased Nanda had illicit relations with her brother-in-law (Devar) Mahesh. When this came to the notice of the family members, both of them committed suicide to save themselves of the ignominy. Co-accused Naresh has been granted bail under section 439 Cr.RC. for this reason. 3. Learned PP. has opposed the bail application. 4. I have considered the submissions made at the bar and have also perused the relevant documents placed before me including the statements of witnesses recorded under sections 200 and 202 Cr.RC. on protest petition. 5. Having regard to the submissions made at bar and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case at this stage but looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant pre-arrest bail to them. 6. In the result, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Smt. Vimala W/o Shri Narayan Sawami and Narayan Das Sawami in FIR No. 7/02 they shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/investigating Officer provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000,/- with one surety each 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 previous permission of the court. Application allowed *******