SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Raj) 12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
Prashant Kumar Agarwal, J.
Savita and Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4456 of 2016
Decided On : 05-01-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Kapil Gupta
For the Respondent: R.R. Gurjar

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 438—Anticipatory bail—Prosecution for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 385, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 167 and 120-B IPC—On consideration of material made available on record as well as evidence collected during course of investigation which is produced by way of case diary, it is a fit case in which benefit of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is to be granted to petitioners—Application for anticipatory bail allowed.

       Result—Application allowed.

ORDER :

Prashant Kumar Agarwal, J.

1. Apprehending their arrest the accused-petitioners have jointly filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in respect of FIR No. 380/2014 registered at Police Station Kotwali Sawaimadhopur for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 385, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 167 and 120-B IPC. The allegation against the petitioners are that they entered into criminal conspiracy with co-accused-Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat and prepared forged and fabricated injury reports to support the allegations made in FIR No. 161/2013 registered at Police Station Shrimahaveerji, District Karauli for offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323 IPC at the instance of accused-petitioner-Dr. Hari Singh. The bail application filed by the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur vide order dated 5.4.2016. It is to be noted that benefit of anticipatory bail was granted to co-accused-Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat by Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur vide order dated 5.2.2016.

2. Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this application are that accused-petitioner-Dr. Hari Singh, who is father of accused-petitioner-Smt. Savita, lodged FIR No. 161/2013 on 18.11.2013 at Police Station Shrimaveerji, Karauli for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323 IPC and for offence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Against husband of petitioner-Smt. Savita Shri Bhupendra Kumar Meena a Judicial Officer and his several family members with the allegation that accused-petitioner Smt. Savita was harassed and cruelty was committed upon her when their demand for dowry could not be fulfilled. It was also alleged that the dowry articles have not been returned despite demand was made. It was also alleged that Smt. Savita was beaten two times as averred in the FIR. Alongwith the FIR two injury reports of Smt. Savita prepared by co-accused Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat were also filed before the police. It is said that after investigation the allegations made in the aforesaid FIR No. 161/2013 have been found to be false and FR has already been submitted before the concerned Court which has been accepted. During the course of investigation of FIR No. 161/2013, complainant-Shri Ajay Kumar, who is brother of Shri Bhupendra Singh, lodged present FIR with the allegations that both the injury reports filed alongwith FIR No. 161/2013 are forged and fabricated which have been prepared by co-accused-Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat at the instance of present petitioners. It is to be noted that at the relevant time Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat was posted as Medical Jurist at Government Hospital, Sawaimadhopur whereas accused-petitioner-Dr. Hari Singh was posted as Chief Medical & Health Officer at Sawaimadhopur. It was alleged in the FIR as Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat was posted under accused-petitioner-Dr. Hari Singh he prepared false and fabricated injury reports of accused-petitioner-Smt. Savita under the pressure and influence of accused-petitioner Dr. Hari Singh.

3. In support of the application, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted as below:-

"(1) The present FIR has mechanically been registered for offences 467, 468 and 471 IPC, which all are non-bailable offences, without application of mind although no such offences can be said to be made out even prima facie if the allegations made in the FIR are accepted. It is an admitted fact that when the injury reports in dispute were prepared co-accused-Dr. Makhhanlal Kanwat was posted as Medical Jurist in Government Hospital, Sawaimadhopur and both the injury reports were prepared by him in that capacity and these bear his signatures and seal and also signatures of both the petitioners and in view of these admitted facts, it cannot be said that any false, fabricated and forged document was prepared within the meaning of Sections 463 and 364 IPC. Merely as alleged by the complainant that these injury reports w




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top