Allowed

Mahendra v. State

Rajasthan HC26 Aug 2021CRLMB/9379/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed joint bail applications filed by three accused persons facing IPC charges. Relying on the absence of grievous injuries, completion of investigation, and likelihood of a long trial, the Court released them on personal and surety bonds with a condition to appear when summoned.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail conditioned upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the trial court.

Mahendra Vs State — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9379/2021
Mahendra S/o Ravi Das, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Railway Kuwa
No. 3 Barmer.
(At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10042/2021
1. Sandeep S/o Ravi Das, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Bapu
Colony, Barmer.
(At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail
Barmer)
2. Arjun S/o Ravi Das, Aged About
27 Years, R/o Bapu Colony,
Barmer. (At Present Lodged In
Dist. Jail Barmer)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Ojha
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP
Mr. Siddharth Karwasra for the
complainant

¶3

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

¶4

Order

¶5

26/08/2021

¶6

The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who are in judicial custody

¶7

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-9379/2021]

¶8

in connection with F.I.R. No.256/2021, Police Station Kotwali Barmer, District Barmer, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 323 and 307 of the I.P.C.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant. Perused the material available on record.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that none of the injuries have been found grievous in nature on any vital part of the body and not declared as dangerous to life; petitioners are behind the bars since 06.07.2021; no investigation or recovery is pending against the petitioners; and trial of the case will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that the benefit of bail may also be granted to the petitioners.

¶11

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have fervently and vehemently opposed the bail applications and stated that this offence has been committed third time by the accused-petitioners; earlier one another case had been registered against Mahendra; nine other cases had been registered against Sandeep and three other cases had been registered against Arjun, it shows that accused-petitioners are habitual offenders.

¶12

Learned Public Prosecutor submits a factual report which shows that expert opinion has not been obtained in regard to injury report dated 04.07.2021 in absence of X-ray report.

¶13

In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that as per rejection order itself, total nine cases have been pending against the accused-petitioner Sandeep, cases mentioned at serial

¶14

(3 of 3)

¶15

[CRLMB-9379/2021]

¶16

No.1 to 4 have already been decided, therefore, number of cases

¶17

pending against accused-petitioner Sandeep are only five.

¶18

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the facts that none of the injuries have been found grievous in nature on any vital part of the body and not declared as dangerous to life; and further investigation and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed by the petitioners deserve to be accepted.

¶19

Consequently, the bail applications are allowed. It is ordered that the petitioners – Mahendra S/o Ravi Das (Bail Application No.9379/2021) and Sandeep S/o Ravi Das and Arjun S/o Ravi Das (Bail Application No.10042/2021), all arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.256/2021, Police Station Kotwali Barmer, District Barmer, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶20

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

¶21

19-20-Rashi/-

Mahendra v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra v. State

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

Ajay Pal Singh @ Krishna Pal Singh Vs State

Mahaveer Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Singh Vs State

Bhagirath Khor Vs State of Rajasthan

Radhakishan Vs State of Rajasthan-State

Babu Lal Vs State of Rajasthan