Amar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Amar Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Application allowed Court Rajasthan Decided Jul 28, 1988

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/763047

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/763047
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Mohini Kapoor, J.
Decided On: Jul 28, 1988
Case Number: S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 1798 of 1988
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Application allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code - Section 438--Anticipatory bail--Police recording statements of voters and polling agent--Statement of independent witness Returning Officer not recorded--Held, petitioner be granted anticipatory bail.;Bail Granted - - One of them is that he is an employee of the Indian Overseas Bank and n...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Application allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Amar Singh

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 1988WLN(UC)179

Excerpt

criminal procedure code - section 438--anticipatory bail--police recording statements of voters and polling agent--statement of independent witness returning officer not recorded--held, petitioner be granted anticipatory bail.;bail granted - - one of them is that he is an employee of the indian overseas bank and number two, that while making the investigation, the police has so far not, recorded the statement of the returning officer who could be the best witness of the incident which occured in the polling booth. 5000/- (rupees five thousnad) with one surety in the like amount, to his satisfaction, on the following conditions:mohini kapoor, j.1. heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned public prosecutor.2. the facts and circumstances of the case have been considered and also the matters which can be said to be in favour of the petitioner. one of them is that he is an employee of the indian overseas bank and number two, that while making the investigation, the police has so far not, recorded the statement of the returning officer who could be the best witness of the incident which occured in the polling booth. other voters and polling agents have been examined but independent person is not before this court. in these circumstances anticipatory bail can be granted.3. the sho/arresting officer, investigating officer, p.s. khetri district jhunjhunu in fir no. 103/88 is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner amar singh son of shri roopa ram by caste jat, resident of ilakjhar he be relased on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of rs. 5000/- (rupees five thousnad) with one surety in the like amount, to his satisfaction, on the following conditions:[a] that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;[b] that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquinted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuades him from disclosing such facts to the court, or to any police officer; and[c] that the petitioner shall not leave india without the previous permission of the court.

Full Judgment

Mohini Kapoor, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

2. The facts and circumstances of the case have been considered and also the matters which can be said to be in favour of the petitioner. One of them is that he is an employee of the Indian Overseas Bank and number two, that while making the investigation, the police has so far not, recorded the statement of the Returning Officer who could be the best witness of the incident which occured in the polling booth. Other voters and polling agents have been examined but independent person is not before this Court. In these circumstances anticipatory bail can be granted.

3. The SHO/Arresting Officer, Investigating Officer, P.S. Khetri District Jhunjhunu in FIR No. 103/88 is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of petitioner Amar Singh son of Shri Roopa Ram by Caste Jat, resident of Ilakjhar he be relased on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees five thousnad) with one surety in the like amount, to his satisfaction, on the following conditions:

[a] that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

[b] that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquinted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuades him from disclosing such facts to the Court, or to any Police Officer; and

[c] that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1988 Same Parties Amar Singh vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Mohini Kapoor, J.

Criminal