Allowed

Kishanlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Aug 2022CRLMB/10409/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Court held it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail in a case relating to NDPS, Arms Act, and IPC offences, noting lack of recovery and weaker evidence vis-a-vis co-accused already on bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon execution of personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Kishanlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10409/2022

¶3

Kishanlal S/o Madanlal, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Kheda Kesunda, Police Station Choti Sadri, District Pratapgarh (Raj.) (Presently Lodged In District Jail, Pali)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

		----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Vineet Jain Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Ashok Kumar Panwar
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan,P.P.

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS Order

¶9

26/08/2022

¶10

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the applicant for grant of bail in connection with FIR No.13/2017, registered at Police Station Falna, District Pali, for offences punishable under Sections 8/15 & 8/18 of the NDPS Act and Section 3/25 & 3/27 of the Arms Act and Section 307, 332, 353, 482 & 485 IPC.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no recovery has been made from possession of the present applicant. He has been involved in this case only on the basis of information given by co-accused Hanuman Ram recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. As per prosecution case, he supplied the narcotic substance to co-accused Hanuman Ram. There is no other connecting evidence against the

¶13

(2 of 2)

¶14

[CRLMB-10409/2022]

¶15

applicant. Similarly situated co-accused Rajaram, Omprakash, Kanaram, Sohanlal, Vishwlal, Mangilal and Madanlal have already been enlarged on bail by by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The case of the present applicant is not graver than the case of co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail. In view of the above circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays to allow the bail application.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail application.

¶17

Having regard to the rival submissions made by the learned counsel 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 deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶18

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the applicant Kishanlal S/o Madanlal, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.13/2017, registered at Police Station Falna, District Pali, shall be released on bail provided he shall execute personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sound & solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so.

¶19

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

¶20

28-Samvedana/-

Kishanlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishanlal 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

Mukesh Kumar Vs State

Govind Vs State

Arbaaz Hussain Vs State of Rajasthan

Amrik Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Shakir @ Mandal Vs State of Rajasthan

Girdhari Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan