Bail petitions by petitioners Vijay Saini and Kamal Luhar challenging their detention in connection with offences under the Electricity Act, 2003. The High Court rejected the applications as the matter was still at the investigation stage.
Bail applications rejected; petitioners can move fresh applications after charge-sheet filing.
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. 301 / 2018
Vivek Saini S/o Shri Ramji Lal Saini B/c Mali, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Behind Jeen Mata Mandir, Ward No. 13, Police Station Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur. (presently Confined in Central Jail Jaipur)
----Petitioner Versus
State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 302 / 2018 Kamal Luhar S/o Shri Gopi Ram, Luhar, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Mohalla Badabaas, Azad Chauk, Police Station Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur. (presently Confined in Central Jail Jaipur)
Versus State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.N. Sandu Spl. P.P. for JVVNL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Order
24/01/2018
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-301/2018]
(PANKAJ BHANDARI), J.
Amit/50-51
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted at the investigation stage under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
nullReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vivek Saini
Kamal Luhar
State of Rajasthan
Pankaj Bhandari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
