Partly allowed

Hukum Chand S/O Dhanna Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 Nov 2020CRLMB/8758/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to petitioners in three connected criminal bail applications except for Mukesh Kumar, whose application was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court noted the dispute arose from a gate installation between neighbours with a cross FIR.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioners except Mukesh Kumar on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each.

Hukum Chand S/O Dhanna Lal 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. 7931/2020

¶3

Shivraj S/o Ramesh Chand, R/o Gram Dobra Ps Khanpur Dist. Jhalawar Raj. (At Present In Dist. Jail Jhalawar)

¶4

Kanhaiya Lal S/o Kishan Lal, R/o Gram Dobra Ps Khanpur Dist. Jhalawar Raj. (At Present In Dist. Jail Jhalawar)

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8758/2020

¶11

Hukum Chand S/o Dhanna Lal, R/o Gram Dobra Ps Khanpur Dist. Jhalawar Raj. (At Present In Dist. Jail Jhalawar )

¶12

Mukesh Kumar S/o Shyam Bihari, R/o Gram Dobra Ps Khanpur Dist. Jhalawar Raj. (At Present In Dist. Jail Jhalawar )

¶13

----Petitioners

¶14

Versus

¶15

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶16

----Respondent

¶17

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10396/2020

¶18

Rameshchand S/o Ramchandra, R/o Dobada Ps Khanpur Dist. Jhalawar Raj. (At Present Confined In Dist. Jail Jhalawar Raj.)

¶19

Deshraj S/o Rameshchand, R/o Dobada Ps Khanpur Dist. Jhalawar Raj. (At Present Confined In Dist. Jail Jhalawar Raj.)

¶20

----Petitioners

¶21

Versus

¶22

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

(2 of 3)

[CRLMB-7931/2020]

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Shailesh Kumar Panwar, through VC
	Mr. Rohit Khandelwal, through VC
For Complainant(s)	: Mr. Vikas Sharma, through VC
For State	: Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

¶27

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶28

Judgment / Order

¶29

23/11/2020

¶30

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

¶31

F.I.R. No. 164/2020 was registered at Police Station Khanpur, District Jhalawar (Raj.) for offence under Sections 143, 307, 452, 323, 504 of I.P.C.

¶32

Counsel for Petitioner, Mukesh Kumar in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8758/2020 does not want to press the bail application.

¶33

Accordingly, Bail Application of Mukesh is Dismissed as withdrawn.

¶34

It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that as per the FIR, Mukesh was armed with the ‘g andasi’ and he gave blow on the head of the deceased. The other injured persons on the side of complainant received simple injuries. It is also contended that all the witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., named Mukesh and they have named other co-accused as the assailants.

¶35

Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application. It is contended that injuries

¶36

(3 of 3)

¶37

[CRLMB-7931/2020]

¶38

were caused to the intimidate the family

¶39

I have considered the contentions.

¶40

Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioners and also taking note of the fact that parties are neighbours, the dispute took place on installation of gate, there is cross FIR and bail application of Mukesh is withdrawn, hence I deem it proper to allow the bail applications of other co-accused except Mukesh.

¶41

Bail applications of the petitioners except Mukuesh are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 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.

¶42

A copy of this order be placed in connected files.

¶43

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶44

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /5-7

Hukum Chand S/O Dhanna Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hukum Chand S/O Dhanna Lal 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

Mubarik @ Mubba S/O Aasu Vs State of Rajasthan

Renu Kumar Jain S/O Shri Ratan Lal Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Kabbu Beg @ Mangilal S/O Sh. Wahid Beg Vs State of Rajasthan

Lokesh S/O Durga Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Durgesh@Babu S/O Radulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shivraj S/O Ramesh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan