Allowed

Arun Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Apr 2022CRLMB/4855/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court observed that most offenses were triable by a Magistrate, incarceration had been for approximately two months, and further investigation/trial would take time. Bail was granted subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each to the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Release of the petitioner on bail conditional upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the trial court.

Arun Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4855/2022

¶3

Arun Kumar S/o Sh. Balram, Aged About 27 Years, Khartwasiya, At Present R/o W.No. 18, Tara Nagar, Dist. Churu (Raj.). (Petitioner Is Lodged In Sub Jail Rajgarh, Dist. Churu).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through PP

¶7

	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. R.S. Choudhary with Mr. Devendra Mahalana
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi,PP

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA Order

¶9

26/04/2022

¶10

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.69/2022, Police Station Taranagar, District Churu, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 386, 506, 201 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

Heard and considered arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that except offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, all the remaining offences are triable by Magistrate; petitioner has falsely

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLMB-4855/2022]

¶15

been implicated in this case; petitioner is under incarceration since 04.03.2022; no other case is registered against the petitioner; further investigation and trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.

¶16

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner and stated that one pistol including magazine, two live cartridges and one car bearing registration number – RJ 10 CA 7561 have been recovered from the co-accused Manish. It is further stated that bail application (No.3724/2022) of co-accused Ankit Kulhari has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 06.04.2022.

¶17

In reply learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the bail application of the co-accused Ankit Kulhari has been dismissed on the grounds of pendency of cases against the accused and earlier conviction of the accused in other cases.

¶18

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the facts that except offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, all the remaining offences are triable by Magistrate; accused-petitioner is under incarceration for approximately two months; further investigation and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

¶19

(3 of 3)

¶20

[CRLMB-4855/2022]

¶21

Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner, Arun Kumar S/o Sh. Balram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.69/2022, Police Station Taranagar, District Churu, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

¶23

36-Rashi/-

Arun Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar 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

Raju Raj @ Odha Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahipal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul Jaiswal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shankarsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Chandra Patwa Vs State of Rajasthan