Allowed

Ali Mohd. S/O Shri Habula v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC25 Jan 2022CRLMB/1187/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the fourth bail application of the accused petitioner under Section 439 CrPC. The court enlarged him on bail without expressing an opinion on merits, emphasizing the recording of hostile statements and the conclusion of a compromise.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail upon execution of a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Ali Mohd. S/O Shri Habula Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 4th Bail Application No. 1187/2022

¶3

Ali Mohd. S/o Shri Habula, Resident Of Nangal Dhanna, Police Station Rajgarh District Alwar, Rajasthan (At Present Confined in Alwar Jail)

¶4

----Accused Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek, Advocate (through VC) For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, PP

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶9

Order

¶10

25/01/2022

¶11

This 4th bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 CrPC seeking regular bail in FIR No. 26/2021 registered at Police Station, Rajgarh, Distt. Alwar for the offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 452 IPC (challan was filed for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 307, 325, 326, 147, 148 and 149 IPC).

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. She further submits that both the parties have entered into the compromise and the same has been attested by the trial court vide its order dated 6.1.2022 for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 325 and 323/149 and 325/149 IPC. She further submits that after rejection of 3rd bail application by this Court on 29.11.2021, statement of Reena (PW-3), Rahul (PW-4)

¶13

(2 of 2)

¶14

[CRLMB-1187/2022]

¶15

and Roozdar (PW-5) have been recorded by the trial court on

¶16

6.1.2022 and they have been declared hostile. She further submits that the statement of injured Haruni Khan under Section 161 CrPC had already been recorded on 9.2.2021. Thereafter her subsequent statement under Section 161 CrPC was recorded on 24.4.2021. There are material contradictions in the statements of Haruni Khan recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The petitioner is in judicial custody since long and the conclusion of trial will take long time, hence he may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

Learned PP appearing for the State has opposed the same.

¶18

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶19

Therefore, this 4th bail application is allowed and accused petitioner Ali Mohd. S/o Habula is ordered to be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court, with the stipulation that the petitioner shall appear before that court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶20

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶21

DILIP KHANDELWAL /41

Ali Mohd. S/O Shri Habula v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Mohd. S/O Shri Habula 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

Dulichand S/O Shri Lalaram Vs the Mahaveer Housing Co. Operative Society Ltd.

Smt. Meena Kumari Pareek W/O Shri Lalit Kumar D/O Shri Rakesh Vs Lalit Kumar Pareek S/O Shri Badrilal

Vikram Meruta S/O Hazari Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Chet Ram Vs Nathu and Anr.

Guddi Bai D/O Kalu Vs Mangi Bai W/O Balaram

Moti Lal Verma S/O Ramnath Verma Vs Kunj Bihari S/O Bhojraj