Allowed

Rahul S/O Ramnarayan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 May 2022CRLMB/463/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed bail applications filed by two accused persons charged with offences under Section 302 IPC. The court deemed it just and proper to enlarge them on bail considering the likelihood of a prolonged trial, subject to furnishing a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial Judge.

Rahul S/O Ramnarayan Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 19515/2021

¶3

Hemant Kuamr Son Of Ramnarayan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Hanuman Nagar, Lanka Colony, Baran, Police Station Kotwali Baran, District Baran ( Raj.) ( At Present Confined In District Jail Baran, District Baran.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 463/2022 Rahul S/o Ramnarayan, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Hanuman Nagar Lanka Colony Baran Ps Kotwali Baran Distt. Baran Raj. (At Present Confined In Distt. Jail Baran Distt. Baran )

¶10

----Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶13

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. N K Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. M S Saini, PP

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶15

Order

¶16

19/05/2022

¶17

The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioners Hemant Kuamr Son Of Ramnarayan and Rahul S/o Ramnarayan. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.368/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali Baran, District Baran for the offence(s) under Sections 302 & 34 of IPC.

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CRLMB-19515/2021]

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false cases have been foisted against the petitioners. He further submits that the star witness projected by the prosecution to substantiate the charges have turned hostile. He drew attention of this Court towards the statement of PW-2 Sonu @ Nana and PW-3 Rahul @ Annu have examined in the trial are not supporting the case of the prosecution. He further submits that they have nothing to do with the alleged offence and no useful purpose would be served by keeping them behind the bars.

¶21

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶22

Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the possibility that the trial may take long time to conclude, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners, named above, shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶24

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶25

GAURAV SHARMA /9-10

Rahul S/O Ramnarayan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul S/O Ramnarayan 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

Dharam Singh Son of Seetaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rameshwar Prasad S/O Hariprasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishal @ Dholya S/O Shri Om Prakash Paridwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Jasveer Singh Son of Shri Gurmel Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhura Son of Shri Udai Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh S/O Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan