Allowed

Rajkumar Singh@Rajveer Singh S/O Shri Om Singh Rajawat B/C Rajput v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Nov 2020CRLAS/2283/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail appeal, quashing the earlier rejection order for bail. The appellant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is quashed; appellant released on bail via personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each.

Rajkumar Singh@Rajveer Singh S/O Shri Om… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2283/2019

¶3

Rajkumar Singh@rajveer Singh S/o Shri Om Singh Rajawat, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Choti Koldi Village Gudha Salt, Thana Nawa Distt. Nagour At Present Residing At Shriram Colony, Near Shriram Mandir, Thana Kotwali Distt. Nagour Raj. (Presently Confined At Central Jail Jaipur)

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pankaj Gupta, through VC For Complainant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Yadav for Mr. Rajeev Surana, through VC For State : Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶10

Judgment / Order

¶11

26/11/2020

¶12

Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated 24.09.2019 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Cases, Jaipur whereby, bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the appellant was rejected.

¶13

F.I.R. No. 322/2019 was registered at Police Station Chitrakoot, Jaipur West for offence under Sections 302 of I.P.C.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the incident took place in the night of 12.06.2019. Petitioner was arrested on 16.06.2019 at 1:30 pm. There is no evidence that may show presence of petitioner at the place of occurrence. The witnesses who have stated that they have seen the petitioner with the

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLAS-2283/2019]

¶17

deceased were not subjected to identification parade. It is also contended that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have opposed the appeal. It is contended that presence of petitioner is evident from the tower location.

¶19

I have considered the contentions.

¶20

Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the appellant, I deem it proper to allow the appeal.

¶21

The order dated 24.09.2019 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Cases, Jaipur is quashed and set-aside and this appeal is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused appellant 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

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶23

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /145

Rajkumar Singh@Rajveer Singh S/O Shri Om Singh Rajawat B/C Rajput v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar Singh@Rajveer Singh S/O Shri Om Singh Rajawat B/C Rajput 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

Jitendra S/O Jaswant Vs State of Rajasthan

Ghanshyam S/O Daulat Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh S/O Shri Khuddi @ Chetram Vs State of Rajasthan

Gagan S/O Hariram @ Timmoli Vs State of Rajasthan

Madan S/O Shri Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganesh @ Rajesh S/O Shri Hamiraram Vs State of Rajasthan