Allowed

Ajay Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2023CRLMB/241/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur allowed the bail application of Ajay Kumar, arrested for offences under IPC Sections 307, 326/34 and Arms Act. Granting bail based on similarity with co-accused cases and the likely duration of the trial without evaluating merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-. With two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 241/2023 Ajay Kumar S/o Sh. Chunni Lal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Vill. Kala Khet Khandi Obari, P.s. Kherwara, Dist. Udaipur. (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Dungarpur).

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶6

----Respondent

¶7

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ranjeet Singh Chouhan
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Arun Kumar,PP

¶8

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶9

Order

¶10

09/01/2023

¶11

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.120/2022 Police Station Kalyanpur, District Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 326/34 of IPC and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 03.01.2023 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14991/2022, whereby co-accused Sunil Kumar S/o Jeevaram and Sunil Kumar S/o Amritlal have already been granted bail. The said order reads as under:-

¶13

“The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.120/2022 of Police Station Kalyanpur, District Udaipur, for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 326/34 of IPC. They have preferred these bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶14

(2 of 3)

¶15

[CRLMB-241/2023]

¶16

according to the statement of eye witness Jai Kumar, in which specific allegation for causing injuries by knife has been levelled against co-accused Praveen and the present petitioners are only caught hold the injured. Counsel further submits that no recovery was made from the possession of the present petitioners. Challan of the case has already been presented. The accusedpetitioners are in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bails should be granted to the accused-petitioners.

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bails to the accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is directed that petitioners (1) Sunil Kumar S/o Jeevaram & (2) Sunil Kumar S/o Amritlal, shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.120/2022 of Police Station Kalyanpur, District Udaipur provided they execute personal bonds in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.”

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor though opposes the bail application but could not refute the aforesaid factual matrix.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶21

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-241/2023]

¶22

This Court finds that the aggravated role in this case has been attributed to co-accused Praveen Kumar.

¶23

Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted bail and conclusion of the proceedings is likely to take some time and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶24

Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Ajay Kumar S/ o Sh. Chunni Lal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.120/2022 Police Station Kalyanpur, District Udaipur provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶25

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶26

248-nirmala-

Ajay Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay 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

Mohd.Rafique Vs Rahmat Bano

Vikas Bhalla Vs State of Rajasthan

Pooja Soni Vs State of Rajasthan

Chetram Vs State of Rajasthan

Amit Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pratap Ram Vs State of Rajasthan