Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21395 (RAJ)

DILIP DHING @ DILIP JAIN S/O BABULAL DHING v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/6921/2024 · 2025-01-02

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6921/2024 Dilip Dhing @ Dilip Jain S/o Babulal Dhing, R/o Dag, Tehsil Dag Police Station Dag District Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.S.Rajawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Kushal Balwada for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 02/01/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this miscellaneous bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC as he is having apprehension of his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No. 132/2024, registered at Police Station Dag, District Jhalawar for offences under Sections 341, 323 & 308 of IPC. 2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Counsel for the petitioner submits that alleged incident took place in the spur of moment. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there was some money dispute between the parties which has been resolved amicably. He further submits that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this matter as the matter has already settled between the parties. He thus, prays that instant bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC may kindly be (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6921/2024] allowed. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that one grievous injury has been found on the head of the injured. Learned counsel appearing for complainant/injured submits that dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably and he has no objection if this anticipatory bail application is accepted. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and especially the fact that dispute between the parties and now same has been resolved amicably and complainant side has no objection if this bail application is accepted, but without commenting on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the anticipatory bail application. 6. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Dag, District Jhalawar in F.I.R. No. 132/2024 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each to his satisfaction on the following conditions :- (i). that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii). that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6921/2024] facts of the case so as to dissuade her 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J ANANDTANWAR/107