Allowed

Iqbal S/O Amaru B/C Mev v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 May 2020CRLMB/1860/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC. The petitioner, in judicial custody for an offence under Section 379 IPC, sought regular bail. The Court, without expressing an opinion on merits, directed his release on bail subject to surrendering a bond and sureties within a specified period.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each before the trial court within two weeks after withdrawal of the lockdown order.

Iqbal S/O Amaru B/C Mev Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1860/2020

¶3

Iqbal S/o Amaru B/c Mev, R/o Vill. Dosras Tehsil Goverdhan Dist. Mathura U.p. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Alwar)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sharma (through Video Conferencing) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Fateh Ram Meena, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶10

Order

¶11

18/05/2020

¶12

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 CrPC seeking regular bail in FIR No. 627/2019 registered at Police Station, Aravali Vihar, Alwar for the offence under Section 379 IPC. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 9.12.2019. He further submits that after the completion of investigation, challan has been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take long time. He further submits that now no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. No other case is pending against him, hence he may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Learned PP appearing for the State has opposed the

¶15

same.

¶16

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-1860/2020]

¶17

Considering the material on record, submissions of learned counsel for both the parties as also taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶18

Therefore, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that the accused petitioner Iqbal S/o Amaru be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each before the trial court, subject to its satisfaction, within two weeks after withdrawal of the order of lock-down.

¶19

If the aforesaid two sureties, as directed above, are not furnished by the petitioner within the aforesaid period, Court below would be free to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶20

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶21

DK/6

Iqbal S/O Amaru B/C Mev v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iqbal S/O Amaru B/C Mev 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

Shyam Lal and Anr. Vs Ajmat Singh Thr Lrs

Ramesh Chand Agarwal Vs Mahendra Kumar Agarwal and Ors.

Jaswant Singh Meel Vs Ramniwas and Ors.

Meena Sahu W/O Mr. Sitaram Sahu Vs State of Rajasthan

Shri Ramniwas@Bhagwandas B/C Julawah (Chamar) Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramniwas@Bhagwandas B/C Julawah (Chamar) Vs State of Rajasthan