HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Nirmal Kamra & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12612 of 2021
Decided On : 07-03-2022
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners No.2 & 3 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with F.I.R. No.222/2021, Police Station J.N.V. Colony, Bikaner, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed an anticipatory bail application apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.222/2021, Police Station J.N.V. Colony, Bikaner, for various offences under the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the bail application for petitioner No.1 but permitted them to surrender before the trial court and file a bail application. Petitioners No.2 & 3 were granted anticipatory bail based on the lack of specific allegations against them and the absence of their signatures on the document in question.
Issues: Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for multiple offences under the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the specific allegations, signatures on the document, and the arguments presented to determine the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Final Decision: The bail application was rejected for petitioner No.1, who was permitted to surrender and file a bail application. Petitioners No.2 & 3 were granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.222/2021, Police Station J.N.V. Colony, Bikaner, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C.
2. after hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner No.1 Nirmal Kamra, hence this bail application qua petitioner No.1 is rejected.
3. However, the petitioner No.1 Nirmal Kamra is permitted to surrender before the concerned trial Court on or before 14.03.2022 and file an application for bail and it is expected from the concerned trial Court that the bail application will be decided on the same day.
4. Till 14.03.2022, the petitoner No.1-Nirmal Kamra shall not be arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.222/2021, Police Station J.N.V. Colony, Bikaner, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C.
5. So far as petitioners No.2 & 3 are concerned, counsel submits that no specific allegation has been levelled against them and their signatures are not present on the document i.e. agreement to sale. In such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioners No.2 & 3 in jail for an indefinite period. Thus, the petitioners No.2 & 3 may be released on anticipatory bail.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners No.2 & 3 under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
8. accordingly, the bail application is partly allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners (1) Mamta Kamra, W/o Nirmal Kamra & (2) Hari Prashad Prajapat S/o Shri Hanuman Prajapat in connection with F.I.R. No.222/2021, Police Station J.N.V. Colony, Bikaner, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C, they shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-
(i). that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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
(iii). that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.
The court's decision was influenced by the specific allegations, lack of signatures on the document, and the arguments presented in the case.
The court may grant anticipatory bail considering the compromise arrived at between the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments presented.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the compromise between the parties and the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation.
Grant of Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there is insufficient evidence to warrant custodial interrogation, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the right to personal liberty.
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. can be granted when the investigation is complete and the allegations are primarily civil in nature, provided certain conditions are met.
The main legal point established is the court's discretion to grant anticipatory bail based on the individual circumstances of the petitioner, including age and health condition.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.