Partly allowed

Ramswaroop S/O Ramnarayan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Feb 2020CRLMB/760/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted withdrawal of anticipatory bail applications by two petitioners, dismissing their same as withdrawn. For the third petitioner, Hukam, the Court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. subject to standard conditions including a bond and restrictions on inducement or leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw anticipatory bail granted for first two applicants. Anticipatory bail granted for third applicant subject to bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000.

Ramswaroop S/O Ramnarayan 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. 760/2020

¶3

Ramswaroop S/o Ramnarayan, By Caste Mali, R/o Near Agarwal College, Gangpur City, District Sawaimadhopur.

¶4

Bacchu S/o Ramnarayan, By Caste Mali, R/o Near Agarwal College, Gangpur City, District Sawaimadhopur.

¶5

Hukam S/o Ramswaroop, By Caste Mali, R/o Near Agarwal College, Gangpur City, District Sawaimadhopur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohar Pal Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, P.P. Mr. Jitendra Pandey for the complainant

¶11

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

¶12

Order

¶13

13/02/2020

¶14

Learned cousnel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application of applicant No.1Ramswaroop S/o Ramnarayan and applicant No.2-Bacchu S/o Ramnarayan.

¶15

Permission is granted.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application of the aforesaid applicants is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶17

So far as applicant No.3-Hukam S/o Ramswaroop is concerned, this bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.293/2019 registered at P.S. Sadar, Gangapurcity Distt. Sawai Madhopur for the offences

¶18

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-760/2020]

¶19

mentioned therein against the applicant, whereupon the investigation was commenced. Apprehending his arrest, the applicant moved the bail application before the court below, which was dismissed. Hence, this bail application has been filed.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material made available on record.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant No.3 Hukam S/o Ramswaroop has not participated in the assault. Allegation against the applicant is general in nature. Complainant side has implicated him due to over implication. The applicant has not been named. There is no criminal antecedents.

¶22

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

¶23

Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for applicant/s, note of the allegations levelled against the applicant/s as also looking to the 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 grant anticipatory bail to the applicant/s.

¶24

Therefore, this bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant Hukam S/o Ramswaroop in the aforesaid FIR, he shall be released on bail by the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer, provided he furnishes a 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:

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[CRLMB-760/2020]

¶27

i) That the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the police officer, as and when required;

¶28

ii) That the applicant 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 to any police officer;

¶29

iii) That the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the court;

¶30

iv) That the applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected.

¶31

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J

¶32

POORAN CHAND GUPTA /45/77

Ramswaroop S/O Ramnarayan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramswaroop S/O Ramnarayan 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

Om Prakash Dixit S/O Shri Nand Kishore Dixit B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Heeri Devi W/O Shri Narayan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Kumar S/O Ramsharan B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Hari Singh Beniwal S/O Nokram B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Naresh Son of Janak Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh Son of Bhagwan Singh, by Caste Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan