Allowed

Gagan Sharma S/O Hariram @ Timoli v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Nov 2020CRLMB/5965/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This short order disposes of two bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. relating to an FIR for Section 395 IPC. The High Court allowed the applications, directing the release of the accused on bail with a security of Rs.1,00,000 and two sureties of Rs.50,000 each.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 and two sureties of Rs.50,000 each to appear in court.

Gagan Sharma S/O Hariram @ Timoli Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5965/2020

¶3

Gagan Sharma S/o Hariram @ Timoli, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Gangawak, Thana Nagar, Distt. Bharatpur, At Present Confined In Central Jail Alwar

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7790/2020

¶10

Asam S/o Gujji, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Rundh Khoh Ps Khoh Dist. Bharatpur (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg Dist. Bharatpur)

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sinsinwar through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, PP

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶17

Order

¶18

05/11/2020

¶19

Petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

F.I.R. No.283/2019 was registered at Police Station Kherli,

¶21

District Alwar, for offence under Section 395 of IPC.

¶22

It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that petitioners

¶23

have remained in custody for a period of one year. There is no test identification parade.

¶24

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-5965/2020]

¶25

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed these bail applications. It is contended that petitioners are having criminal antecedents.

¶26

I have considered the contentions.

¶27

Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioners, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.

¶28

These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioners shall be released on bail provided they furnish 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 they 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.

¶29

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 petitioners’ repeating offence, S.H.O. can move the Court for cancellation of bail.

¶30

A copy of this order be placed in connected file.

¶31

HEENA/87-88

Gagan Sharma S/O Hariram @ Timoli v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gagan Sharma S/O Hariram @ Timoli 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

Ramakant S/O Bhikko @ Bhikam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Umar Khan S/O Nadan Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Shanu Sepat D/O Sh. Rajendra Sepat W/O Sh. Harlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharamveer S/O Raghuveer Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramphool Choudhary D/O Ramlal Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Sher Ali @ Sheru Khan @ Sheru S/O Shri Janhagir Kha Vs the State of Rajasthan