[2025:RJ-JP:9075] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No.181/2024 Ruchika Sodhi W/o Ronjan Sodhi, R/o House No. 39, Girnar Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ronjan Sodhi S/o Malvindar Sodhi, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 40, The Mall Road, Firozpur Cantt, Punjab, Presently Residing At S-424, First Floor, Greater Kailash, Part-1 Delhi. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 03/03/2025 1. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the anticipatory bail application of respondent No.1 Ronjan Sodhi was allowed by the learned Session Court vide order dated 12.09.2024. It is argued that the learned court below granted the anticipatory bail to the respondent after perusing the memo of understanding entered between the parties. It is further argued that the respondent No.1 did not adhere to the conditions mentioned in the memorandum of understanding entered between the parties and the stridhan of petitioner is yet to be recovered. It is also contended that the statement of minor child was recorded during the investigation and it was found that the offences under Sections 75 and 77 of Juvenile Justice Act is made out against [2025:RJ-JP:9075] (2 of 2) [CRLBC-181/2024] respondent No.1, therefore, considering the above facts, the bail order passed in favour of respondent No.1 requires cancellation. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor justifies the order passed by the Court below. 3. Heard and perused the impugned order dated 12.09.2024. 4. The facts of the case shows that respondent No.1 is married to the petitioner on 05.02.2006 and were living separately from the last 6 to 7 years. The said FIR for the offences under Sections 498-A and 406 of IPC was filed in the year 2023 i.e., after living separately for a long period of time. The learned Court below, after considering the entire facts and after perusing the memorandum of understanding entered between the parties on 07.10.2023, granted the anticipatory bail to respondent No.1. The trial Court also observed that the allegations of abusing the minor child also not found to be proved against the respondent No. 1. Therefore, considering the above facts, I do not find any perversity in the order passed by the learned trial Court. 5. Accordingly, the instant cancellation miscellaneous bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner is devoid of any merits and is hereby dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-58