Allowed

Ramjas S/O Jaikishan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Sept 2022CRLMB/9748/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan allowed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 CrPC for accused Ramjas, who was arrested for offences under IPC and the Arms Act. The applicant, an employee of Railways, was granted bail pending further有关法律 development.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; accused to furnish personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each upon arrest.

Ramjas S/O Jaikishan Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

IGH OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHIIN

¶2

BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous sail Application No, 974812 Ramjas 510 jaiCishant R/o Kasola, Tehsil Rewarit Police ,022 Kasola, District Rewari ( Haryana) Station

¶4

State Of Rajasthan, Through The pp.

¶5

----Respondent

¶6

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Gupta, Senior Advocate with

¶7

Mr. Kapil Bhardwaj and Ms. Savita Nathawat

¶8

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Mehla, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶10

Order

¶11

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr. P. C. on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR NO. 340/2018 registered at Police station Mundawar District Alwar (Raj.) for the offence(s) under Sections 143, 302. 149 1206 of IPC and Sections 3/25. 5/27 and 7/25 of the Arms Act..

¶12

2. plr. A. K. Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the accused-applicant that accused-applicant i5 employee of Railways. Learned has has relied upon nnexure-3. wherein, the railway authorities. counsel that the accused-applicant was on duty at after i nvestigationt took pIaCe HE has also submitted that COtime the have been enlarged O bail vide order dated 05.02.2020, .ccused 2019 and I8.05.2020. 11.12. **_23.0.2020~_**

¶13

Considering the argu merits advanced by the counse\ for the partieS and that ~O-CCUS~~ have been enlarged on bail; that railway authorities 'pan have clarified that the accused-ap'icant was duty on the date of alleged incident; and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on meritsidemerits of the case, this court is inclined to allow the anticipatory bail application of the accusedapplicant.

¶14

5. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S. -011 .O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Mundawar District Alwar (Raj.) in F.I.R. No. 34012018 is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant-Ramjas S/o Jaikishan, he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶15

that the petitioner shall make himself (i) available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

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

¶17

(jii) that the petitioner shall not ieave India without previous P ermission of the court.

¶18

(SAMEER 3AIN)tJ

Ramjas S/O Jaikishan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramjas S/O Jaikishan 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

Vivek Bharadwaj Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Harisingh S/O Late Vasudave Vs Managing Director

Girdhari Gurjar S/O Shri Sharvan Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Shane Aalam @ Shanu S/O Yunush Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganpat Mali S/O Shri Heera Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajay Kumar Sharma S/O of Shri Chandrasain Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan