The High Court enlarged the petitioners, Bhursid and Islam S/o Deene Khan, on bail under section 439 CrPC in a criminal appeal filed against an order of dismissal of a similar bail application by the lower court.
Petitioners enlarged on bail; directed to furnish personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 with two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000 to trial court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
S. B. ~ri mi nal Mi sc. ~ai 1 ~ppl i cati on NO. 10332/2016 1,~hursid S/o Deene Khan. 2.Islam S/O Deene Khan.
Both of the B/c-Mev, R/o ~handi kal a,PS Ti j ara, ~istt.~lwar.
State of ~ajasthan
Date of Order
PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Mr.RR Goya1 for the petitioner(s) Mr.~ish-i raj Singh, PP for the State Mr. Di nesh sharma for the compl ai nant Mr.~evashish Dev, CI Beawar, Ajmer is present in person
This bail application has been filed under section 439 CrPC.
Brief facts of the case are that an FIR 0.565/2015 **_VJS_** lodged at police station ~ijara,~lwar for -the offences mentioned therein, whereupon the i nvesti gati on was commenced. ~uri ng the course of i nvesti gati on, the peti ti oner(s) was/were arrested. ~e/she/they moved the bai 1 appl i cati on before the court below, which was dismissed.
Learned counsel for the peti ti oner (s) has contended that although FIR has been registered under section 376(2g) IPc but the police has reached to the concl usi on that the offences are made out under sections 323, 341 and 326/34 IPC which are triable by first class Magistrate. He has further contended that the peti ti oner/s has/have fa1 sel y been imp1 i cated in the matter. ~e/~hey/she is/are in judicial lock up since long and . conclusion of trial 1 take time.
Hence he/she/they should be re1 eased on bai 1 . Mr. ~evashish Dev, CI Beawar, ~jmer who is present be-Fore this court has made a statement that he was earlier posted at police station ~i jara and now he has been -transferred to Beawar. He has stated that no offence under section 376(2g) IPC is not made out against the petitioner but offences are made out against the petitioners are under section 323, 341 and 326/34 IPC. earned PP appearing for the state as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bai 1 appl i cation.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record. ~ooking to the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem just and proper to enlarge the peti tioner(s) on bai 1 . heref fore , thi s bai 1 appl i cati on i s a1 1 owed and it is directed that accused petitioner(s) ~hursid S/o Deene ~han and 1slam S/O Deene Khan shall be released on bail under section 439 crpc in connection with aforesaid FIR provided he/she/they furni sh(es) a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/(Rs. TWO Lakh), with two sureties of RS. 1,00,000/(RS. One Lakh) to the satisfaction of the trial court with the stipulation that he/she/they shall appear before that court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner(s) should be released on bail under section 439 CrPC
Whether the nature of offences charged would fit within exception to bail
What are the conditions to be imposed while enlarging the petitioner(s) on bail
1 provisions across 1 enactments
BHURSID S/O DEENE KHAN
ISLAM S/O DEENE KHAN
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
