Partly allowed

Noratnath v. State

Rajasthan HC12 Apr 2022CRLMB/4078/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order dismissed the bail application of petitioner No.1 as not pressed. It allowed the bail application of petitioner No.2, ordering his release on personal bond with two sureties while the trial of the case is pending.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner No.2 directed to be enlarged on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties; Petitioner No.1 bail application dismissed as not pressed.

Noratnath Vs State — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4078/2022

¶4

Noratnath S/o Dhanna Nath, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 29, Delwa Basti, Loonkaransar, Police Station Loonkaransar, District Bikaner.

¶5

(At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner)

¶6

Dhanna Nath S/o Sohan Nath, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ward No. 29, Delwa Basti, Loonkaransar, Police Station Loonkaransar, District Bikaner.

¶7

(At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner)

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State of Rajasthan Through Pp

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Mehta. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, P.P. Mr. Sunil Vishnoi.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶14

Judgment / Order

¶15

12/04/2022

¶16

The petitioners have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.234/2021, Police Station Loonkaransar, District Bikaner, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 326, 341, 34 of I.P.C. The petitioners have preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to press this bail application on behalf of petitioner No.1.

¶18

Accordingly, the present Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application qua petitioner No.1-Noratnath S/o Dhanna Nath is dismissed as not pressed.

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[CRLMB-4078/2022]

¶21

So far as petitioner No.2-Dhanna Nath is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no specific averment has been made against the petitioner No.2 for the alleged crime. The petitioner is in judicial custody and trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner No.2.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

¶23

I have considered the arguments advanced before me and gone through the material available on record.

¶24

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to release the petitioner No.2 on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is partly allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner No.2 Dhanna Nath S/o Sohan Nath shall be enlarged on bail in F.I.R. No.234/2021, Police Station Loonkaransar, District Bikaner 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 learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶27

86-prashant/-

Noratnath v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noratnath 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

Dinesh Kumar Vs State

Aditi Sharma Vs State

Aditi Sharma Vs State

Chutra Ram Vs State

Suman Devi Vs State

Ashish Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan