Allowed

Suraj@Daini S/O Dansingh B/C Meena v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Oct 2019CRLMB/10318/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed bail to the petitioner accused in an FIR involving IPC offences and Arms Act contravention, directing release on personal bond with sureties despite criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each, subject to appearance and condition regarding repeat offences.

Suraj@Daini S/O Dansingh B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10318/2019

¶3

Suraj@daini S/o Dansingh B/c Meena, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Bhopar Ps Balghat Dist. Karauli Raj. (At Present Accused Petitioner Is Confined At Sub Jail Hindaun City )

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Avasthi For State : Mr. Arvind Bhadu, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶10

Judgment / Order

¶11

21/10/2019

¶12

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

¶13

F.I.R. No. 69/19 was registered at Police Station Shri Mahaveerji Distt. Karauli Rajasthan for offence under Sections 473, 482 of I.P.C. and Section 3/25 of Arms Act.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that offence is triable by First Class Magistrate. Petitioner is in custody for last seven months. Charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take time.

¶15

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶16

It is contended that petitioner has criminal antecedents.

¶17

I have considered the contentions.

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CRLMB-10318/2019]

¶20

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

¶21

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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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.

¶22

However, it is made clear that if the petitioner repeats the offence, State would be free to move application for cancellation of bail before the concerned Court.

¶23

A copy of this order be sent to concerned S.H.O. for recording this condition in the Village Crime Record Book so that in the event of petitoner's repeating offence, S.H.O. can move the Court for cancellation of bail.

¶24

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶25

Amit Kumar/2

Suraj@Daini S/O Dansingh B/C Meena v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj@Daini S/O Dansingh B/C Meena 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

Alok Jain and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Sanjay Bhandari Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Smt.Saraswati Devi W/O Late Shri Balgovind Vs State of Rajasthan

Niranjan Lal Chipa S/O Shri Rekharam B/C Chipa Vs State of Rajasthan

Niranjan Lal Chipa S/O Shri Rekharam B/C Chipa Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh S/O Shri Kanna Ram Vs State of Rajasthan