Allowed

Dungar Singh @ Jhunjhar Singh v. State

Rajasthan HC12 May 2022CRLMB/3212/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by two petitioners apprehending arrest in connection with an FIR for alleged offences under Sections 323, 336, 324, 308/34 IPC. The court directed release on bail subject to a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each.

Dungar Singh @ Jhunjhar Singh Vs State — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3212/2022

¶4

Dungar Singh @ Jhunjhar Singh S/o Raan Singh, Aged About 40 Years,

¶5

Raan Singh S/o Jeevraj Singh, Aged About 70 Years, Both R/o Village Parava, Chitalwana Police Station, District Jalore

----Petitioners

Versus

State, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tej Ram For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Rajpurohit, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶12

Order

¶13

12/05/2022

¶14

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No.82/2020, Police Station Chitalwana, District Jalore for the offences under Sections 323, 336, 324, 308/34 IPC.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that co-accused Rajendra Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by this court and case of the present petitioners is similar to that of the co-accused. Counsel further submits that the injured has received only simply injuries and there are cross cases between the parties, in such circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioners behind the bars for indefinite time. Therefore, the petitioners may be released on anticipatory bail.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMB-3212/2022]

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

¶20

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners (1) Dungar Singh @ Jhunjhar Singh S/o Raan Singh & (2) Raan Singh S/o Jeevraj Singh in connection with FIR No.82/2020, Police Station Chitalwana, District Jalore, the petitioners shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the following conditions :-

¶22

(i). that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶23

(ii). that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and

¶24

(iii). that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶25

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶26

111-MS/-

Dungar Singh @ Jhunjhar Singh v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dungar Singh @ Jhunjhar Singh 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

Narpat Singh Vs State

Balvinder @ Bindu @ Binder Vs State

Toluram @ Tolaram Vs State

Kiranbala Vs State

Ramniwas @ Rama Manju Vs State of Rajasthan

Prem Singh Vs State