ABHIMANYU YDADAV S/O RAJ SINGH YADAV v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/9007/2024 · 2025-02-05
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 25266 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 25266 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:5183] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9007/2024 Abhimanyu Yadav S/o Raj Singh Yadav, R/o Village Naharkheda, Post Khanpur Ahir, Tehsil Mundawar, Police Station Mundawar, Dist. Khairthal-Tijara (Raj.) . ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.P. Tiwari, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/02/2025
1. The instant pre-arrest bail application has been filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. filed on behalf of the petitioner, who is having apprehension of arrest in F.I.R. No.262/2023 registered at Police Station Tijara, District Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) for offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 427, 435 & 511 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that initially, FIR was registered for the bailable offences and later on, to make out the non-bailable offences, offence punishable under Section 436 of IPC has been added during the course of investigation. Counsel submits that from bare reading of the FIR, no offence under Section 436 IPC is made out. Counsel submits that petitioner is ready to co-operate with the
[2025:RJ-JP:5183] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9007/2024] investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not served any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner and further considering averments made in the FIR wherein it has been mentioned that one person tried to set fire in the cabin, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Tijara, District Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) in F.I.R. No.262/2023 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner- Abhimanyu Yadav S/o Raj Singh Yadav, 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 the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station 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 facts of the case
[2025:RJ-JP:5183] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9007/2024] 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /269