Allowed

Vijendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Aug 2023CRLMB/8104/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur allowed the bail application of Vijendra Singh arising from an FIR for offences under IPC Sections 365, 342, and 376(1). The court noted an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR and issued a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge.

Vijendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8104/2023

¶3

Vijendra Singh S/o Sh. Kishan Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Imli Ka Badiya Gafa, P.s. Tadgadh, Dist. Ajmer (Raj) (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Rajsamand)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

	Versus
State Of Rajasthan,	Through PP ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Kishan Singh, petitioner’s Father present inperson
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.K. Bhati,PP

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARZAND ALI

¶7

Order

¶8

21/08/2023

¶9

The lawyers are abstaining from appearing before the Court. 2. The instant bail application has been filed by petitioner Vijendra Singh S/o Shri Kishan Singh under Section 439 Cr.P.C. against the order impugned passed by learned court below in connection with FIR No.83/2023 registered at Police Station Bhim, District Rajsamand for the offences under Sections 365, 342, 376(1) of IPC.

¶10

Mr. Kishan Singh, relative of the petitioner is present in person before this Court and submits that the alleged incident took place on 04.02.2023 for which the mater was reported by the Police on 27.03.2023 and no explanation whatsoever has been furnished with regard to the inordinate delay in lodging of the FIR as well as why she kept mum for a long time. After going through the averments made in the FIR and her statement recorded under

¶11

[CRLMB-8104/2023]

¶12

(2 of 2)

¶13

Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate as well as statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigating Officer and taking into account the pretext upon which she join the association of the petitioner and that no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars till disposal of the case. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶14

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 bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Vijendra Singh S/o Sh. Kishan Singh, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶16

(FARZAND ALI),J

¶17

76-Hanuman/-

Vijendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijendra Singh 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

Kalu Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Chanchal Kanwar Vs State

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jasvindra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan