Allowed

Lallu S/O Sarupa v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Sept 2024CRLMB/10507/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench allowed bail applications filed by four accused persons involved in an FIR for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court held that as no specific overt act was assigned to the petitioners, they could be enlarged on bail despite the prosecution's opposition.

What did the court decide?

Accused-petitioners enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each.

Lallu S/O Sarupa Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:37874]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10134/2024

¶4

Ramkhiladi S/o Sarupa, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Garota Hall Jagsahypura PS Manpur, Distt. Dausa. (Accused In Distt. Jail Dausa).

¶5

Ramesh S/o Ramdhan, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Garota Hall Jagsahypura PS Manpur, Distt. Dausa. (Accused In Distt. Jail Dausa).

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

Connected With

¶11

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10507/2024

¶12

Lallu S/o Sarupa, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Garota Ps. Mahandipur Balaji, Hall Jagsahaypura, PS Manpur, Distt. Dausa. (Accused In Distt. Jail Dausa).

¶13

Kamlesh S/o Ramdhan, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Garota Ps. Mahandipur Balaji, Hall Jagsahaypura, PS Manpur, Distt. Dausa. (Accused In Distt. Jail Dausa).

¶14

----Petitioners

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶17

----Respondent

¶18

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.R. Goyal For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakad, Public Prosecutor Mr. Gajender Singh Rathore & Mr. Dinesh Chandra Sharma for complainant

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶20

Order

¶21

06/09/2024

¶22

These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of

¶23

the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of

[CRLMB-10134/2024]

[2024:RJ-JP:37874]

(2 of 3)

accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.215/2024 registered at Police Station Manpur, District Dausa for offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 109(1), 324(4) and 324(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are omnibus allegations in the FIR but no specific overt act has been assigned to any of the petitioners for causing any grievous injury. Learned counsel further submits that the accused-petitioners are in custody since 02.08.2024 and they are no more required for any kind of interrogation or recovery, therefore, the accusedpetitioners may be released on bail.

¶29

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by two learned Advocates appearing for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail applications and submits that there are specific allegations against the petitioners which is evident from the complaint filed by the Police, therefore, the accused-petitioners do not deserve indulgence of bail by this Court.

¶30

Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and also perused the material available on record.

¶31

Having regard the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners so also the fact that no specific overt act has been assigned to any of the petitioners in the FIR and also in the statements of the injured witnesses, this Court without expressing

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:37874]

[CRLMB-10134/2024]

any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶36

Accordingly, these bail applications under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners named above in connection with FIR No.215/2024 registered at Police Station Manpur, District Dausa shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶37

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶38

Ashish Kumar /388-389

Lallu S/O Sarupa v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lallu S/O Sarupa 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

Mohin Khan S/O Jaikamdeen Vs State of Rajasthan

Durgaram S/O Malaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahatab @ Maahatab S/O Mohammed Israr Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashish S/O Subhash Chandra Vs State of Rajasthan

Makhkhan Sharma S/O Sri Mahesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkhiladi S/O Sarupa Vs State of Rajasthan