RAKESH KAINTHLA
Reeta Jha – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments presented for and against bail. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. legal standards for anticipatory bail. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. judicial interpretations of section 438 cr.pc. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court allows bail application. (Para 21) |
| 6. final ruling allowing anticipatory bail for enabling proper legal recourse. (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition to seek pre-arrest/transit bail in complaint case No. 1038(C) of 2023, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 4 98-A, 323, 504, and 328 read with Section 3 4 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Sections 3 and 4 of the PROHIBITION OF DOWRY ACT , 1961. It has been asserted that the petitioner was falsely implicated at the instance of her daughter-in-law Smt. Shivangini alias Sakshi. Akash Jha, elder son of the petitioner, got married to the complainant Smt. Shivangini alias Sakshi on 21.2.2019 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. She filed a complaint against the petitioner, petitioner’s two sons and her husband. The complaint was registered as complaint case No. 1038(C) of 2021 in
Ajay Agarwal Vs. State of U.P.
Ameet Khandewal Vs. State of NCT of Delhi
Balchand Jain v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Daler Singh Vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. 2003 SCC Online Del 983: (2004) 72 DRJ 465
Mahesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan
Naiturasu v. State 1998 CrLJ 1762
Nirbhay Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Padma Charan Panda v. S. Ram Mohan Rao
Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka
Saubhagya Bhagat v. State of Uttarakhand
Sennasi and another Vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police
Anticipatory bail – Application seeking anticipatory bail would be maintainable even after filing of charge-sheet in Court. (Majority View)
The jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail exists even after a non-bailable warrant is issued, emphasizing judicial discretion in such matters.
Sec.438 of Cr.P.C reads as Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest.
Anticipatory bail is not maintainable upon issuance of summons for a non-bailable offence unless there is reasonable apprehension of police arrest without warrant.
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 is maintainable even after issuing a non-bailable warrant, balancing individual liberty and legal obligation.
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.