Allowed

Surjeet and Ors. v. State

Rajasthan HC4 May 2018CRLMB/3515/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur allowed the bail application filed by five accused persons facing charges under IPC Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, and 120-B. The court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits, directing the petitioners to execute a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail subject to execution of a personal bond of Rs. 80,000 with two sureties of Rs. 40,000/- each.

Surjeet and Ors. Vs State — Money Laundering | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 3515 / 2018 1.

¶3

Surjeet S/o Shri Brij Lal Nayak, Chak 22 NDR Tehsil & District Hanumangarh.

¶4

Madan Lal S/o Shri Basti Ram, By Caste Nayak, Resident of Chak 7 STG, Tehsil Pilibanga District Hanumangarh.

¶5

Rewant Ram S/o Shri Birbal Ram, By Caste Nayak, Resident of Chak 22 NDR Tehsil & District Hanumangarh.

¶6

Prithviraj S/o Shri Subhash, By Caste Nayak, Resident of Chak 22 NDR Tehsil & District Hanumangarh.

¶7

Nathu Ram S/o Shri Kurda Ram, By Caste Nayak, Resident of Mohanmagriya Tehsil & District Hanumangarh. (At Present Lodged in District Jail, Hanumangarh)

¶8

----Petitioners Versus The State of Rajasthan ----Respondent _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Matoria

¶9

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Awasthi,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶11

Order

¶12

04/05/2018

¶13

The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 181/2018 of Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 120-B of IPC. They have preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case and offences are triable by Magistrate. The accused-petitioners are in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accusedpetitioners.

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶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, the bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioners 1) Surjeet S/o Shri Brij Lal Nayak, 2) Madan Lal S/o Shri Basti Ram, 3) Rewant Ram S/o Shri Birbal Ram, 4)Prithviraj S/o Shri Subhash, and 5) Nathu Ram S/o Shri Kurda Ram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.181/2018 of Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh; provided they execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.80,000/with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.40,000/- each of them 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

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG) J.

¶21

TN/51

Surjeet and Ors. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surjeet and Ors. v. State

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

Prahald Ram Vs State

Babu Nath Vs State

Rajendra Vs State

Suresh Kumar Vs State

Rohitash @ Ravi Vs State

Rohit Kumar Vs State