Allowed

Manoj Kumar Yadav Son of Panchuram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Apr 2023CRLMB/780/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the accused-petitioner, who alleged false implication in an offence under Section 379 IPC. The court framed conditions for release on bail upon arre

What did the court decide?

The applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, subject to specified conditions.

Manoj Kumar Yadav Son of Panchuram Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 780/2023

¶3

Manoj Kumar Yadav Son Of Panchuram, Resident Of Village Samalpura, Tehsil Phulera, Ps Phulera District Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Rinesh	Kumar Gupta with
	Mr.	Gaurav	Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Suresh	Kumar

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order

¶10

21/04/2023

¶11

The present bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.3/2023 registered at Police Station Phulera, District GRP, Ajmer for the offence(s) under Section 379 of IPC.

¶12

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has nothing to do with the alleged offence. The vehicle which is a tractor, has already been recovered. Trial is likely to take long time to conclude. His custodial interrogation would not be required for any purpose.

¶13

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶14

Having considered the overall allegations leveled in the FIR and contentions made by the counsel for the accused-petitioner.

¶15

[CRLMB-780/2023]

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

Taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the accused-petitioner.

¶18

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Phulera District GRP, Ajmer in F.I.R. No.3/2023 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Manoj Kumar Yadav Son Of Panchuram, 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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 so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

¶21

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶22

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶23

CHHAYA AWASTHI /112

Manoj Kumar Yadav Son of Panchuram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Yadav Son of Panchuram 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

Fardeen Khan Son of Shri Atahar Ali Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Kumar Ram Son of Shri Ramchandra Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Shabnam Parveen W/O Shri Mohammad Rizwan Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishan Kumar Son of Shri Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Sitaram Dantel S/O Ramnarayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanwarmal Soni Son of Shri Bajrang Lal Soni Vs State of Rajasthan