Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt Pramila vs State on 21 October, 2020
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11253/2020
1. Smt Pramila W/o Chanchal Kumar Bhil, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Gundee Ka Bhilwara, P.s. Kelwara, Tehsil
Kumbhalgarh, Dist. Rajsamand. (At Present Lodged At
District Jail Rajsamand).
2. Smt. Rupli Bai W/o Ganeshram Bhil, Aged About 48
Years, Gundee Ka Bhilwara, P.s. Kelwara, Tehsil
Kumbhalgarh, Dist. Rajsamand. (At Present Lodged At
District Jail Rajsamand).
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10884/2020
1. Smt. Usha W/o Shri Madan Lal, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Kelwara, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District Rajsamand.
2. Smt. Poonam @ Puna D/o Amba Lal, Aged About 45
Years, R/o Kelwara, District Rajsamand.
3. Smt. Shobha W/o Shri Raju Ram, Aged About 47 Years,
R/o Kelwara, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District Rajsamand.
4. Smt. Kiran W/o Manohar Lal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Kelwara, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District Rajsamand.
5. Smt. Hemlata W/o Shri Chunni Lal, Aged About 46 Years,
R/o Pawtiya, Police Station Kelwara, Tehsil Kumbalgarh,
District Rajsamand.
6. Smt. Sangari @ Hangari W/o Shri Udai Singh, Aged About
61 Years, Patelo Ki Bhagal, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District
Rajsamand.
7. Smt. Lali @ Leela W/o Shri Naru Lal, Aged About 36
Years, Gajpur Machi, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District
Rajsamand.
8. Smt. Kesi Bai W/o Shri Khaman, Aged About 72 Years,
Oladar (Odwadiya), Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District
Rajsamand.
9. Smt. Manju Devi W/o Shri Shambhu Lal Ameta, Aged
(Downloaded on 21/10/2020 at 08:41:38 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLMB-11253/2020]
About 33 Years, Village Antari, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District
Rajsamand.
10. Smt. Kailash W/o Shri Purna Shankar Ameta, Aged About
48 Years, Village Baran, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District
Rajsamand.
11. Smt. Meena Devi W/o Shri Naresh Das, Aged About 34
Years, Village Kariya, Tehsil Kumbalgarh, District
Rajsamand.
----Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swaroop Singh Sisodia (on VC) in
Bail Application No.11253/2020
Mr. Pradeep Shah (on VC) in Bail
Application No.10884/2020
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Farzand Ali, GA cum AAG assisted
by Mr. Sumer Singh Rajpurohit, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order 21/10/2020 In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, lawyers have been advised to refrain from coming to the Courts. In Bail Application No.11253/2020:
This Court perused the material available on record. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.24/2010 of Police Station Kelwara, District Rajsamand for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. They have preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
(Downloaded on 21/10/2020 at 08:41:38 PM)
(3 of 4) [CRLMB-11253/2020] Learned GA cum AAG assisted by learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that conclusion of the proceedings is likely to take some time and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioners (1) Smt. Pramila W/o Chanchal Kumar Bhil and (2) Smt. Rupli Bai W/o Ganeshram Bhil shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.24/2010 of Police Station Kelwara, District Rajsamand provided each of them execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. In Bail Application No.10884/2020:
This application has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No.24/2010 of Police Station Kelwara, District Rajsamand for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC.
Learned GA cum AAG assisted by learned Public Prosecutor points out that the petitioners while acting as Aanganwadi Workers have wrongly identified and demarcated the pregnant ladies for (Downloaded on 21/10/2020 at 08:41:38 PM) (4 of 4) [CRLMB-11253/2020] extension of the benefit under the welfare scheme floated by the government, resulting into benefit of such scheme not reaching the strata, where it was supposed to reach.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that such wrongful identification made by the petitioners alone is a sufficient cause for dismissing the present anticipatory bail application. Furthermore, 53 deliveries have wrongly been stated by the present petitioners depriving the actual needy persons of the welfare scheme, while giving leverage to the concerned wrongly identified and demarcated persons, by making embezzlement of money.
In light of the aforesaid observations, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioners.
Consequently, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
32-33 Zeeshan/-
(Downloaded on 21/10/2020 at 08:41:38 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)