JAGMAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard and perused the case diary. On 11.12.98 Matadeen informant lodged an FIR 184/98 against the present applicants wherein it was stated that on 7.12.98 Smt. Pushpa Devi had gone for attending the hearing of her cases at Kishangarh but when she did not returned from there up to 9.12.98, he went to village Vila Heri to enquire about her : at Vila Heri his daughter Savita informed him that Smt. Pushpa had stayed with her on 8.12.98 and then had left for her village. On further inquries the came to know that Pushpa Devi had taken a seat in a bus at Bila Heri Bus Stand but the applicants persuaded her to get down from the bus and took, her with them to their house in the same village. The applicants were, thus, alleged to have committed the offence under Sec. 366 and 376 IPC.

(2.) As against the version of the prosecution, the version given by the applicants is that Smt. Pushpa Devi was the wife of yonger brother of Matadeen and had got three daughters from her husband, her husband died about 6 or 7 years ago. Since Matadeen wanted to grab the agricultural land inheritted by her from her deceased husband, she was harassed by him. She conducted Nata Marriage with Rati Ram of village Heri. Matadeen thereupon lodged false report against the applicants for having kidnapped Smt. Pushpa Devi and it was in connection with the case that Smt. Pushpa Devi had gone to Kishangarh for attending the hearing of the case. On 9.12.98 Smt. Pushpa Devi had filed an affidavit in the said case wherein she had stated that she had never been kidnapped by Rati Ram Matadeen the elder brother of her husband was unnecessarily harrassing her and her new in-laws in order to pressurise her to give up her claim for the land of her previous husband. In that behalf she had also complained to the higher authority in police department. Learned counsel for the applicant, thus, submitted that Matadeen, in order to pressurise the applicants, had lodged a totally false complaint against the present applicants, who are the new in-law of Smt. Pushpa Devi, in that behalf, copy of the complaint filed by Rati Ram, the new husband of Smt. Pushpdevi against the complainant party was also produced before me.

(3.) After having gone through the document as produced before me and thorough study of the case diary I direct that in the event of arrest of the applicants namely Jagmal Singh 2. Jagdeesh 3. Lal Singh 4. Sonia 5. Nandkishore accused in FIR No. 184/98 P.S. Kotkasim shall be released on bail on their furnishing two sureties in the amount of Rs. 5,000.00 each with personal bond(s) in the amount of Rs. 10,000.00 to the satisfaction of the Officer arresting them and shall observe the following conditions :