The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the second bail application, finding no substantial change in facts or circumstances warranting release on bail.
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 O R D E R
S.B.Criminal Misc.Second Bail Application No.2764/2016 (Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan)
Date of Order ::::: 09.05.2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL
Mr.Sandeep Sharma, for the applicant. Mr.Virendra Godara,Public Prosecutor for State.
On consideration of submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and the material made available on record including the statements of material prosecution witnesses so far recorded during the course of trial, copy of which has also been made available on record, I do not find any substantial change in the facts and circumstances of the case so as to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Consequently, the second application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
(PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL), J teekam S.No.8.
“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.”
Teekam Khanchandani Private Secretary
1 issue framed by the court
Whether substantial change in facts and circumstances justifies granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chand
State of Rajasthan
Prashant Kumar Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
