Allowed

Harphool Choudhary Son of Sitaram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Apr 2023CRLMB/3356/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court discharged bail to three accused petitioners involved in an FIR concerning offences under the IPC. The Court deemed it just to grant bail, directing them to furnish a personal bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Accused petitioners released on bail subject to personal bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Harphool Choudhary Son of Sitaram Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/006637]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.

¶4

3356/2023

¶5

Harphool Choudhary Son Of Sitaram, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Gudhanathawatan Police Station Sadar District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Bundi)

¶6

Giriraj Choudhary Son Of Sitaram, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Gudhanathawatan Police Station Sadar District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Bundi)

¶7

Dinesh Choudhary Son Of Harphool, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Gudhanathawatan Police Station Sadar District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Bundi)

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudarshan Kumar Laddha, Adv. For : Mr. Sanjeev Mahla, PP Respondent(s) Mr. Sameer Khan, Adv.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

¶14

Order

¶15

13/04/2023

¶16

This bail application has been filed by the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular

[2023/RJJP/006637]

(2 of 3)

[CRLMB-3356/2023]

bail in FIR No.12/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar Bundi, District Bundi for the offence(s) under Section(s) 341, 323, 324, 325, 308, 34 of IPC.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the accused-petitioners are in judicial custody since long and the conclusion of the trial will take long time, hence the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the bail application.

¶23

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioners namely, 1.Harphool Choudhary Son Of Sitaram 2.Giriraj Choudhary Son Of Sitaram 3.Dinesh Choudhary Son Of Harphool shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of

¶25

[2023/RJJP/006637] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3356/2023]

¶26

Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioners shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J

¶28

Gaurav/75

Harphool Choudhary Son of Sitaram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harphool Choudhary Son of Sitaram 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

Kumar Singh S/O Shripat Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay Kumar Puniya @ Tiger S/O Vidadhar Vs State of Rajasthan

Hanuman S/O Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishnu Sharma @ Nasa S/O Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramhet S/O Prabhu Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanhiyal @ Kanha S/O Indra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan