The High Court allowed bail applications filed by two accused persons under Section 439 Cr.P.C., directing their release pending trial upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 with two sureties each of Rs. 1,00,000.
Released on bail subject to personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 and two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000 each.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B.Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 3945 / 2017
----Petitioners Versus ----Respondent
State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.S. Shekhawat, P.P. for State.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Judgment
22/03/2017
This bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Brief facts of the case are that an FIR No. 106/2017 was registered at P.S. Manak Chouk, Jaipur Metropolition for the offences mentioned therein against the accused petitioner. During the course of investigation, the accused petitioner(s) was/were arrested. Thereafter he/she/they moved the bail application before the trial court, who vide impugned order dismissed the same. Hence this bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner(s).
Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has contended that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case, they have
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-3945/2017]
nothing to do with the alleged crime, there is no case made out against the petitioner(s). It has also been contended that the accused petitioner(s) is/are in judicial lockup since long and the conclusion of trial of the case is likely to take time, hence the accused petitioner(s) should be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to release the petitioner(s) on bail.
Therefore, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner(s) (1) Smt. Sanjana Devi W/o Krishan and (2) Smt. Rajkumari @ Munni Devi W/o Lt. Malkhan shall be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with afore-mentioned FIR provided he/she/they furnish(es) a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac) each 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.
(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA)J.
Manisha/-241
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail petition should be allowed granting interim bail to the accused?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Sanjana Devi W/o Krishan
Smt. Rajkumari @ Munni Devi W/o Lt. Malkhan
State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
Mahesh Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
