Allowed

Vijendra v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Nov 2018CRLMB/10732/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge of Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, granted bail to petitioners in a criminal matter involving abduction and extortion charges. The court noted the dispute was compromised and a witness turned hostile, allowing bail via personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Public petitioners released on bail via personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/each for appearance till trial completion.

Vijendra Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 10732/2018

¶3

Vijendra S/o Asharam, Aged About 33 Years, B/c Jat , Malgaon , Distt. Nagaur (Lodged In Central Jail Bikaner)

¶4

Ramesh S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Jat , Khetash , Distt. Nagaur (Lodged In Central Jail , Bikaner)

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Farzand Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, P.P. Mr. H.M. Sarswat, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶10

Order

¶11

13/11/2018

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶13

The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.587/2014 of Police Station Nokha, Bikaner for the offences punishable under Sections 364A, 342, 382, 386, 323 and 143 I.P.C. They have preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that allegation against the petitioners is to the effect that they had abducted the complainant Indra Kumar and extorted money from him through one Shri Kishan. It is submitted that as a matter of fact the dispute between the petitioners and the complainant is in respect of some business transaction in which some money of the

¶15

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-10732/2018]

¶16

petitioner No.1 was due towards the complainant and on account of that dispute, the false case has been lodged against them. It is submitted that now the matter has been compromised between the parties. It is also submitted that one witness Shri Kishan (PW2) has not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that trial of the case will take time because number of prosecution witnesses are to be examined.

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application, however, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has confirmed that the parties have entered into compromise.

¶18

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶19

Accordingly, this bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioners No.1 Vijendra S/o Asharam and No.2 Ramesh S/o Bhanwar Lal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.587/2014 of Police Station Nokha, Bikaner provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶20

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶21

Babulal./60

Vijendra v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijendra v. State of Rajasthan

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

Chetan Prakash Vs State

Ramesh Vs State

Bhupram Vs State

Ram Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwati Lal Vs State