Allowed

Laxminarayan @ Monu S/O Shri Jagdish Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Jan 2021CRLAS/1696/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A special criminal appeal was filed against the rejection of a bail application. The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the single judge's order, and granted bail pending further proceedings, subject to furnishing a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order quashed; appellant released on bail with a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each.

Laxminarayan @ Monu S/O Shri Jagdish Sharma Vs State of… — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1696/2020

¶3

Laxminarayan @ Monu S/o Shri Jagdish Sharma, Aged About 25 Years, R/o House No. 176 Manglam Vihar Sanna Doongar Jhotwara Ps Kardhani Jaipur Rajasthan (At Present Accused In Judicial Custody At Central Jail Sever Distt. Bharatpur)

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶7

Victim D/o Late Shri Ramsingh, R/o Kolipada Helak Darwaja Kumher Ps Kumher Distt. Bharatpur Raj.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Azad Ahmed For State : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order

¶11

20/01/2021

¶12

Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated 02.11.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Bharatpur, whereby, bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the appellant was rejected.

¶13

F.I.R. No.332/2020 was registered at Police Station Kumher, District Bharatpur for offence under Sections 376, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(w) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the appellant that prosecutrix is having relationship with the appellant for a pretty long time. Prosecutrix is a major. There is an inordinate delay in lodging of FIR. It is also contended that Charge-sheet has been filed. Disposal of appeal will take time.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLAS-1696/2020]

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor contends that he has informed the complainant about filing of the present appeal.

¶18

No one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant, despite information.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the appellant, I deem it proper to allow the appeal.

¶22

The order dated 02.11.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Bharatpur is quashed and setaside and this appeal is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused appellant shall be released on bail provided he 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 he 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.

¶23

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶24

CHANDAN /120

Laxminarayan @ Monu S/O Shri Jagdish Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxminarayan @ Monu S/O Shri Jagdish Sharma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surendra Singh Bhati@Sonu Singh S/O Shri Hukaam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu Son of Puran, Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil Wadhwa S/O Late Atmaram Wadhwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurmeet@Shiva S/O Harisingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Nitharwal S/O Shri Pokharmal Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Nimit Chaudhary S/O Shri Govind Ram Jat Vs Central Bureau of Investigation