Allowed

Azad S/O Gendi Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Jul 2023CRLMB/5877/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by a minor petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding injuries caused in an alleged affray, granting bail with conditions and a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each and complying with standard conditions.

Azad S/O Gendi Lal Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 5877/2023 Azad S/o Gendi Lal, R/o Bkhaniyo Ki Dhani, Village Mundiya, Police Thana Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk, Rajasthan through Natural Guardian Father Gendi Lal S/o Narayan, R/o Bkhaniyo Ki Dhani, Village Mundiya, Police Thana Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk.

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Rajasthan through P.P.

¶6

----Respondent

¶7

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Shanker Sharma Mr. Pawan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.S. Rathore, GA-cum-AAG

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA Order

¶9

03/07/2023

¶10

This anticipatory bail application has been filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.144/2022 registered at Police Station Niwai Sadar, District Tonk for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 336, 289, 504 & 307/34 of IPC.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide its order dated 18.11.2022 and second anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was also dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide its order dated 12.04.2023 with liberty to file afresh through his natural guardian as per law before the concerned Court. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is minor and his date of birth is 15.08.2006, hence, he was about 16 years of age at the time of alleged

¶12

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-5877/2023]

¶13

incident, which occurred on 07.08.2022. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Counsel also submits that the anticipatory bail application of co-accused Sita and Jhuma has already been granted by this Court vide its order dated 18.11.2022 and the bail application of other co-accused Gendi Lal under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been granted by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 20.03.2023. Therefore, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the third anticipatory bail application of the petitioner may kindly be granted.

¶14

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶15

Heard. Perused the material available on record and also the case diary.

¶16

As per injury & X-Ray report of injured- Buddhi Devi and Ram Singh, all injuries are simple in nature and as per injury report of injured- Rampati, her sole injury is grievous in nature which is on her skull. As per FIR, Gendi Lal inflicted injury with knife on skull of Rampati w/o late Ramjilal Meena, who is mother of the complainant- Ram Singh. Therefore, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

¶17

Accordingly, this third anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner- Azad S/o Gendi Lal in the aforesaid FIR by the Investigating Officer, he shall be released on bail provided his natural guardian Gendi Lal (father of the petitioner) furnishes a personal bond in

¶18

(3 of 3)

¶19

[CRLMB-5877/2023]

¶20

the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of

¶21

Rs 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of concerned SHO/IO on the following conditions:

¶22

i) That the petitioner will make himself available for the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶23

ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without permission of the Court.

¶24

iii) That the petitioner will not tamper with the evidence or threaten or pressurize the witnesses in the case.

¶25

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶26

Satyendra/12

Azad S/O Gendi Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azad S/O Gendi Lal 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

Mashrul Hasan S/O Mohammad Yamin Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramsingh @ Raisingh S/O Bhairulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajay Kumar @ Babbu S/O Ramesh Chand Vs the State of Rajasthan

Lal Chand and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Ramraj Choudhary and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Yogendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.