Ramcharan vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Rafiq, J.—Heard learned Counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for State and perused the material available on record.

Contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner and others villagers were collectively agitating against the action of the Sarpanch for making construction of Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra over the land of a school. The construction was originally to be made on a land where certain persons had made encroachment but the Sarpanch did not want to remove such encroachment for which, petitioner along with villagers were insisting, upon which, dispute was raised and petitioner was falsely implicated in the present case. No one had received injury. Petitioner has suffered only because he decided to take resort to his democratic right.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

Having regard to the facts aforesaid but without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case, I deem it just and proper to extend the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

In the result, this anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Ramcharan S/o Ramgopal, he be released by the S.H.O./I.O. in F.I.R. No. 110/2010 P.S. Baroda Mev, District Alwar for offence Under Sections 143, 332 and 353 IPC, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each to his satisfaction with the following conditions:

That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

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

That the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.