Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.
Kaluram Meena - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12217 of 2021
Decided On : 17-09-2021
ANTICIPATORY BAIL - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. after considering the nature of allegations, the lack of substantial evidence against the petitioner, and his cooperation with the investigation. The court emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the presumption of innocence, leading to the decision to allow bail with specific conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Kaluram Meena, sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.200/2020 for offenses under IPC Sections 354, 354B, 354C, 506, and Section 66E of the I.T. Act, claiming false implication and asserting cooperation with the investigation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. did not contain allegations against the petitioner, indicating a lack of substantial evidence for custodial interrogation.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail given the nature of the allegations and the evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that anticipatory bail can be granted when the allegations are not substantiated by evidence, and the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation, thus upholding the principles of personal liberty and presumption of innocence.
Result: The bail application was allowed, and the petitioner was directed to be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties, subject to specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.200/2020 registered at Police Station Tunga, District Jaipur City (East) for the offence under Section(s) 354, 354B, 354C & 506 of IPC and Section 66E of I.T. Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has falsely been implicated in this case. He submitted that in pursuance of direction of this Court dated 10.09.2021, he has joined the investigation, has co-operated therein and his custodial interrogation is not warranted. He, therefore, prayed for release of the petitioner on pre-arrest bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by the
4. learned counsel for the petitioner, the nature of allegation against him, the material contained in the case diary especially the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which is bereft of any allegation against the petitioner; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
5. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner in connection with afore-mentioned FIR registered at concerned Police Station the petitioner Kaluram Meena S/o Shri Budhinarayan Meena shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-
(ii). that the petitioner 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 petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.
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 can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. when the accused cooperates with the investigation and the allegations do not justify custodial interrogation.
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.
Anticipatory bail can be granted in cases where the allegations are primarily civil in nature and do not warrant custodial interrogation.
The court's decision was influenced by the petitioners' cooperation with the investigation and the finding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary for the offence under Sections 354 I.P.C.
The court granted anticipatory bail based on the prosecutrix's voluntary actions, emphasizing the importance of her being a major in the decision.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on an amicable settlement of a civil dispute and the role of the petitioner in the case.
Anticipatory bail is granted when allegations lack substantial evidence, emphasizing cooperation with the investigation and compliance with court conditions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
