Dismissed

Bheru Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC14 Jun 2021CRLMB/4224/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judge rejected an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. While counsel argued lack of injury naming by one eye witness, the Court found the claim of such an omission unsubstantiated as the witness statement eventually named the applicant. Investigation was pending, leading to denial of bail and direction to surrender.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC dismissed and petitioner directed to surrender before the Investigation Officer.

Bheru Lal Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4224/2021

¶3

Bheru Lal S/o Shri Shrawn Gurjar, Aged About 30 Years, Hadmada, P.s. Badnor, District Bhilwara.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Arjun Singh through VC : Mr. Javed Gauri,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS (VACATION JUDGE)

¶10

Order

¶11

14/06/2021

¶12

This application seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.98/2019 registered at Police Station Badnor, District Bhilwara for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 323, 324, 325 & 302 IPC.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during trial injured Bhagu Ram (PW-1) has not named the petitioner and eye witnesses Ugma (PW-2) and Dudaram (PW-3) has also categorically stated that petitioner has not caused any injury to the deceased so petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. As per his contention Dudaram (PW-3) and Ugma (PW-2) have named Bheru Lal in their statements. Investigation is still pending.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMB-4224/2021]

¶17

Having considered rival contentions of the learned counsel

¶18

for the parties and material available on record, in the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court does not deems it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner under Section 438 CrPC.

¶19

Petitioner is also directed to surrender before the Investigation Officer(I.O).

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 438 CrPC is dismissed.

¶21

(RAMESHWAR VYAS (VACATION JUDGE)),J

¶22

30-rahul arya/-

Bheru Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bheru 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

Bhanwar Lal Sharma Vs Mohammad Hussain and Ors.

Surendra Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kalu Ram Vs Mohammad Hussain and Ors.

Ram Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Moti Lal Vs State

Ratanlal Vs State of Rajasthan