Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1517 (RAJ)

Himmata Ram v. State of Rajasthan, Through PP

2019-05-15

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant and also perused the material on record. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with FIR No. 1/2019 of Police Station Pipar City, District Jodhpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 326, 447/143 I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he does not want to press anticipatory bail application preferred on behalf of petitioner No. 1 Himmata Ram, however, seeks liberty for him to surrender before the trial court on or before 22nd May, 2019 on the ground that there is some marriage in his family on 18th May, 2019. 4. In view of above, the anticipatory bail application preferred on behalf of petitioner No. 1 Himmata Ram is rejected as not pressed, however, he is free to surrender before the trial court on or before 22nd May, 2019. Till 22nd May, 2019, the petitioner No. 1 shall not be arrested, however, it is made clear that if he fails to surrender before the trial court on or before 23rd May, 2019, the police is free to arrest him thereafter. 5. So far as anticipatory bail application preferred on behalf of petitioner No. 2 Smt. Singari W/o Sohan Ram is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that she was present at the place of incident, but she did not participate in the fight. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that witness Mangla Ram S/o Dhula Ram in his police statement has specifically stated that the petitioner No. 2 Smt. Singari had tried to intervene in the fight. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner No. 2 Smt. Singari under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 8. 7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused petitioner No. 2 Smt. Singari under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 8. Accordingly, the bail application preferred on behalf of petitioner No. 2 Smt. Singari under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner No. 2 Smt.Singari W/o Sohan Ram in FIR No. 1/2019, Police Station Pipar City, District Jodhpur, she shall be enlarged on bail provided she furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./S.H.O. on the following conditions:- (i) She shall make herself available for interrogation by Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) She 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; (iii) She shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.