Allowed

Ramlal v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Oct 2023CRLMB/13003/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a bail application filed by two accused persons under Section 439 Cr.P.C. regarding offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The court deemed it just and proper to enlarge them on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, without commenting on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail by furnishing personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Ramlal Vs the State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:35265]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13003/2023

¶4

Ramlal S/o Shri Lichaman Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ward No. 08 Ratangarh Dist. Churu Presently Lodged At Sub Jail Ratangarh

¶5

Rameshwar S/o Shri Malaram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Ward No. 08 Padiharo Ka Mohalla Ratangarh Dist. Churu Presently Lodged At Sub Jail Ratangarh

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Vipin Makkad
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Gaurav Singh,PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

¶12

Order

¶13

16/10/2023

¶14

The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioners Ramlal S/o Lichaman Ram and Rameshwar S/o Malaram under Section 439 Cr.P.C against the order impugned passed by learned court below in connection with FIR No.2/27/2023 registered at Police Station Regional Forest Officer, Ratangarh District Churu for the offence(s) under Sections 9 & 51 of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. They are behind the bars and trial may take long time to conclude thus, they deserve to be enlarged on bail.

[2023:RJ-JD:35265]

[CRLMB-13003/2023]

(2 of 2)

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶20

Considering the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners shall be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid FIR provided they furnish 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 their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶23

806-Arti/-

Ramlal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramlal v. the 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

Chandmal Vs Arvind Jain and Ors.

Chand Mal Vs Shiv Prasad and Ors.

The Union of India Vs Babuta Aram and Anr.

Ram Niwas Vs the State of Rajastahn

Mohammed Arif Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajan Chhajgariya Vs State of Rajasthan