Partly allowed

Moolchand S/O Surajmal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Sept 2020CRLMB/6429/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Order dismissing withdrawable bail application of petitioner No.2 while granting anticipatory bail to petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.1 released on bail upon furnishing bond under specified condition.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for petitioner No.1; regular bail application to be filed after surrender; dismissal with liberty for petitioner No.2.

Moolchand S/O Surajmal Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6429/2020

¶3

Moolchand S/o Surajmal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Mohalla Vamanpura Bayana Ps Bayana Dist. Bharatpur Raj.

¶4

Mohan Singh @ Bantu S/o Moolchand, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Mohalla Vamanpura Bayana Ps Bayana Dist. Bharatpur Raj.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brij Mohan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Soni

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

¶11

Order

¶12

07/09/2020

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner No.2-Mohan Singh @ Bantu S/o Moolchand wants to withdraw the bail application with liberty to the accused petitioner No.2 to surrender before the trial court.

¶14

This bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶15

However, the petitioner No.2 may surrender before the Trial Court and file the bail application.

¶16

It is expected from the Trial Court to decide the bail application as filed by the petitioner No.2 as expeditiously as possible.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMB-6429/2020]

¶19

The present bail application has been filed under Section 438

¶20

Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.676/2019 registered at Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur for the offence(s) under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341 and 379 of IPC.

¶21

On consideration of submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and the material made available for my perusal as well as the evidence collected during investigation, which has been produced before me by way of case diary but without expressing any final opinion on the merit and de-merit of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the accusedpetitioner No.1.

¶22

Consequently, the anticipatory bail application of petitioner No.1- Moolchand S/o Surajmal is allowed.

¶23

The SHO/IO/Arresting Authority, Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur in FIR No.676/2019 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner No.1 Moolchand S/o Surajmal he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to his satisfaction on the following conditions :-

¶24

(i) that the petitioner No.1 shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶25

(ii) that the petitioner No.1 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

¶26

(iii) that the petitioner No.1 shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶27

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶28

Jatin /19

Moolchand S/O Surajmal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moolchand S/O Surajmal 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

Ram Babu S/O Shri Ghisa Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikas@Vikki S/O Mahaveer Singh S/O Mahaveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pappu@Ajit S/O Lilaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Om Prakash S/O Sedu Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Harbeer Singh S/O Shyamlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh S/O Kishan Vs State of Rajasthan