High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 09 RAJ CK 0025

Gurusevak Singh vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 11 September 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kuldeep Mathur, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6892 Of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 270 words

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.275/2017 registered at Police Station Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Investigating Officer has already given notice under Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. to the accused petitioner.

In this background and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner-Gurusevak Singh S/o Balvinder Singh in connection with FIR No.275/2017 registered at Police Station Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar, the petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each 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 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 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.