Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22866 (RAJ)

MITHUN DEY S/O PROTUL DEY v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/7817/2024 · 2025-01-03

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:274] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7817/2024 1. Mithun Dey S/o Protul Dey, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 36,37, New Indrapuri Colony, Brahmpuri, Jaipur, Raj. 2. Pawan Kumar Saini S/o Damodar Prasad Singh, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Ward No. 30, Chomu, Tripolia, Chomu, Raj. ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan For Complainant(s) For State : : Mr. K.K. Bhinda Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 03/01/2025 1. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No.124/2024, registered with the Police Station Manak Chowk District Jaipur (North) for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant case is purely a case of civil nature and during pendency of the investigation, the complainant has settled the dispute by way of entering into compromise. Counsel submits that taking care note of the above fact, this Court directed the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer for their interrogation. Counsel submits that pursuant to the aforesaid direction issued by this Court, the accused petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer for their interrogation and now their custodial arrest is not required, hence under these circumstances, indulgence of pre -arrest bail be granted to the petitioners. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer but counsel for the complainant has supported the case of the petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:274] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-7817/2024] 4. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the complainant and looking to the fact that during investigation, the matter has been settled by way of compromise and the petitioners have already appeared before the Investigating Officer and their interrogation has already been done and now their custodial arrest is not required, this Court is of the opinion to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 5. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Mithun Dey S/o Protul Dey & Pawan Kumar Saini S/o Damodar Prasad Singh in connection with FIR No. 124/2024 registered Police Station Manak Chowk, District Jaipur (North) the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :- (i). that the petitioner/s shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required (ii). that the petitioner/s 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/s shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J GARIMA /8