Allowed

Soniram and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Rajasthan HC4 Aug 2017CRLMB/10003/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners in a case involving offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 447, 365, 307 & 120-B of IPC, directing release upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; direction to release petitioners on bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each upon arrest, subject to conditions.

Soniram and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 10003 / 2017

¶3

Soniram S/o Rameshwar B/c Jat, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Harmada, Tehsil Rupangarh, District Ajmer.

¶4

Bholuram S/o Bhanwar Lal B/c Jat, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Harmada, Tehsil Rupangarh, District Ajmer.

¶5

Chetan S/o Bhag Chand B/c Jat, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Harmada, Tehsil Rupangarh, District Ajmer.

¶6

----Petitioners Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishwajeet Mantri

¶10

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Thakuriya, P.P. for State

¶11

Mr. Madan Lal, I.O. P.S. BaBander Sindhri

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order

¶13

04/08/2017

¶14

Petitioners have filed this miscellaneous bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶15

F.I.R. No. 69/2016 was registered at Police Station Bander Sindri for offence under Sections147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 447, 365, 307 & 120-B of I.P.C.

¶16

It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that property in dispute belongs to Mandir. Petitioners were cultivating the land given to them by Pujari for cultivation. They have got stay order with regard to the property. The complainant party attacked the

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMB-10003/2017]

¶19

petitioners upon which a cross F.I.R. was also filed.

¶20

It is also contended by counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have sustained grievous injuries whereas the injuries sustained by the complainant are all simple in nature.

¶21

It is contended that the other co-accused have been granted bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. No useful purpose would be served in arresting the petitioners.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶23

I have considered the contentions.

¶24

Considering the contention put forth by counsel for the petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the anticipatory bail application.

¶25

The anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Bander Sindri in F.I.R. No. 69/2016 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners they shall be released on bail, provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/each to their satisfaction on the following conditions :-

¶26

(i). that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii). that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

¶27

(iii). that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶28

(PANKAJ BHANDARI), J.

¶29

Amit/16

Soniram and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soniram and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sitaram Meena Vs Shri O P Meena and Ors.

Kailash and Anr. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Nand Ram Vs National Highwary Authority

Rahul Nanda @ Rajkumar @ Raja Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Govind Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Mohammad Safiq Vs State of Rajasthan through P P