Allowed

Trilokchand@Ajay Parchya v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC12 Dec 2017CRLMB/16913/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the bail application of the accused charged with IPC offences of causing hurt, attempt to murder, and threatening to cause hurt. The grant was conditioned upon furnishing sureties and appearing before the trial court as required.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each to the trial court.

Trilokchand@Ajay Parchya Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 16913 / 2017

¶3

Tirlokchand @ Ajay Parchya S/o Sh Babulal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Nehru Nagar, Harijan Basti Beawar, District Ajmer, Raj. (At Present Confined Sub Jail Beawar).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan Through PP.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deshraj Kalwania

¶9

For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Singh Rathore, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶11

Order

¶12

12/12/2017

¶13

Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶14

F.I.R. No. 287/2017 was registered at Police Station Beawar City (Ajmer) for offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 308 of I.P.C. later on added Sections 307, 34 of I.P.C.

¶15

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that there are general allegations in the F.I.R. with regard to causing injury. Coaccused have been given benefit of bail by this Court. Initially in the injury report both the injuries were shown as simple and caused by blunt weapon but subsequently doctor has opined that injury No. 1 and injury No. 2 caused to Vikram Prajapati was collectively dangerous to life.

¶16

It is contended that charge-sheet has been filed in this case. Trial would consume time.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMB-16913/2017]

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

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

¶22

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶23

(PANKAJ BHANDARI), J.

¶24

Amit/46

Trilokchand@Ajay Parchya v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Trilokchand@Ajay Parchya v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

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

Omveer Singh and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ramesh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ganga Sahay Soni Vs Mrs Beena Pradhan and Another

Shivam Sharma@Shubham Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ajay Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Banti@Bintesh and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp