Allowed

Amjad Khan @ Jinnan Son of Late Shri Hafiz Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 May 2021CRLAS/221/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 221/2021, the High Court of Rajasthan allowed an appeal against the rejection of a bail application. The court set aside the impugned order and granted bail pending proceedings, contingent upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned bail order dated 15.01.2021 is set aside. Appellants released on bail subject to a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Amjad Khan @ Jinnan Son of Late Shri Hafiz Mohammad Vs… — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 221/2021

¶3

Amjad Khan @ Jinnan Son Of Late Shri Hafiz Mohammad, Resident Of Nearby Amin Pathan Ki Gym, Talab Gaon, Anantpura, Kota (Raj)

¶4

Sonu Pandit @ Imran Son Of Manjur Khan, Resident Of Bagalda, Police Station Badaud, District Shyopur (M.p) Presently Tenant Mufid Bhai Ka Makan, Nearby Tejaji Temple, Krehsar Road, Anantpura, Kota (Raj) (At Present Appellants Confined At Central Jail Kota)

¶5

----Appellants

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

Mohit Son Of Dharasingh, Resident Of Akil Bhai Ka Makan, Imam Bara Ke Pas, Anantpura, Kota (Raj)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. N.P. Meena for Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶12

Order

¶13

07/05/2021

¶14

The appellants have preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated 15.01.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocity Act) Cases, Kota, whereby bail application filed by the appellant was rejected.

¶15

F.I.R. No.511/2020 was registered at Police Station Anantpura, District Kota City, for offence under Sections 323, 341 and 34 of IPC & Sections 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.

¶16

It is contended by the counsel for the appellants that none of

¶17

the injuries sustained by the injured is dangerous to life. Charge-

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CRLAS-221/2021]

¶20

sheet is to be filed.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal. It is contended that he has informed the complainant about filing of the appeal.

¶22

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

¶23

I have considered the contentions.

¶24

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

¶25

The order dated 15.01.2021 is set aside and the appeal is allowed and the appellants are directed to be released on bail provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and 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 to appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶27

HEENA/71

Amjad Khan @ Jinnan Son of Late Shri Hafiz Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amjad Khan @ Jinnan Son of Late Shri Hafiz Mohammad 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

Ghanshyam Singh Khangarot @ Vikram Singh S/O Shri Narayan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Kumar S/O Chittar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Chand S/O Shri Pyarelal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Chand Dhakad S/O Shri Shankar Lal Dhakad Vs State of Rajasthan

Dhariya S/O Joraram Vs State of Rajasthan

Prahalad Sen S/O Chanda Lal Vs State of Rajasthan