Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1853 (RAJ)

Shiv Pal v. State of Rajasthan

2012-08-29

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R. No. 95/2012 registered at the Police Station J.N.V.C. Bikaner for the offences under Sections 307, 323,341 336 and 143 I.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the case diary. 3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that there are cross cases inter-se between the parties and at one point of time it was informed that the parties had entered into compromise. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the bail application and submit that the petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail. Counsel for the complainant docs not dispute that there are cross cases& inter-se between the parties and that numerous persons from both the sides have received injuries. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the order impugned as well as the material available on the record of the case and particularly looking to the fact that there are cross cases inter-se between the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the instant application for bail filed on behalf of the petitioners deserves to be accepted. 6. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Shivpal, Haitram and Sunil in connection with F.I.R. No. 95/2012 Police Station, J.N.V.C., Bikaner, the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions: (1) They shall make themselves' available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required; (2) They 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 to any Police Officer; and (3) They shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court. Application allowed. *******