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

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 1115

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J
SARIF S/O SHERMOHAMMAD @ SHERU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 1543 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. Arvind Sharma, Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP

Anticipatory bail granted when accused demonstrate willingness to cooperate with investigation and no necessity for custodial interrogation is established.

Headnote:(A) BNS Act - Sections 111(2)(a), 303(2), 317(2), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 308(2), 61(2)(a) - IT Act - Sections 66D and 66E - Anticipatory bail applications filed by accused-petitioners in connection with FIR No. 164/2024 - Accused-petitioners claim false implication based on disclosure by co-accused - Recovery of mobile phones and sim cards from co-accused - Accused-petitioners willing to cooperate with investigation - Court allows anticipatory bail applications. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Anticipatory Bail - Criteria for granting anticipatory bail - The court considers readiness to cooperate and absence of necessity for custodial interrogation as justifying factors for granting anticipatory bail. (Paras 5-6)

Facts of the case:
The accused-petitioners apprehend arrest for serious offences under multiple sections of BNS and IT Acts, asserting they were falsely implicated based on co-accused's statements, with no direct evidence against them.

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the accused-petitioners' willingness to cooperate negates the need for custodial interrogation, leading to the granting of anticipatory bail.

Issues: The main issue was whether the accused-petitioners should be granted anticipatory bail given the circumstances of their involvement and cooperation with the investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the lack of direct evidence against the accused-petitioners, combined with their willingness to cooperate, justified the granting of anticipatory bail.

Result: Anticipatory bail applications allowed.

Order :

1. Apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No. 164/2024 registered at Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg for the offence(s) under Sections 111(2)(a), 303(2), 317(2), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 308(2) and 61(2)(a) of BNS and Sections 66D and 66E of IT Act, the accused-petitioners have BNSS.

2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submit that accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case. He further submits that the accused-petitioners were involved solely on the disclosure statement of the other co-accused. The mobile phones, sim cards, cheques etc. were recovered from the other co-accused Jalish and Saddam. The accused-petitioners have not used the mobiles recovered from the other co-accused. It is further contended that the accused-petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioners are not required, therefore, the, anticipatory bail applications of the accused-petitioners may be allowed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail applications.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record.

5. Considering the fact that the recovery of mobile phones and sim cards allegedly used for creating false ID's and obscene videos were effected from the other co-accused namely Saddam and Jalish. The accused-petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and custodial interrogation of the accused- petitioners are not required. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail applications of the accused-petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail applications under Section 482 BNSS are allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioners namely- 1. Sarif S/o Shermohammad @ Sheru, 2. Saddam S/o Vanshi and 3. Aakil S/o Innas in connection with FIR No. 164/2024 registered at Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg, they shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station 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 them 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.

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top