CRLMB3982/2010 CRLMB3984/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN 1. S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.3982/2010 Anil Verma Vs. The State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor 2. S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.3984/2010 Anil Vs. The State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor Date of Order ::: 06.07.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Sajid Ali, Counsel for petitioner in both cases Shri Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material made available to me during the arguments of the case. Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner was initially arrested on 20.10.2009 in FIR No.337/2009 and then his arrest was shown in another FIR No.384/2009 on the very same day; in both these cases he was granted bail, respectively by this Court and the learned court below. In FIR No.690/2009 lodged on 23.10.2009 relating to incident of theft took place on 04.10.2009, he was shown arrested on 27.10.2009 whereas the fact is that he was already arrested by the police on 20.10.2009 i.e. three days prior to lodgment of the FIR and thus the petitioner was shown arrested in FIR No.664/2004 on 28.10.2009. Learned counsel submitted that the manner in which the incident took place itself would show how the police is grossly abusing its authority which is to CRLMB3982/2010 CRLMB3984/2010 // 2 // cover its own inability to nab the real culprit; except these cases, there is no other case ever registered against the petitioner; challan has already been filed; trial of the case is likely to take a long. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, I deem it just and proper to release the accused-petitioner, namely, Anil Verma S/o Ramesh Chand Verma on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.690/2009 and FIR No.664/2009, Police Station Vigyan Nagar, Kota, filed under Sections 379 IPC, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. However, in case petitioner is found indulged in repeating the similar offence at any point of time the prosecution will be at liberty to apply for cancellation of his bail before the court below itself. Both the bail applications stand disposed of. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//