Allowed

Narendra v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Sept 2024CRLMB/10608/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two accused arrested in connection with FIR No. 288/2024 at Police Station Phalodi for an offence under Section 303(2) BNS sought bail. The court, without commenting on merits, enlarged both on bail on furnishing personal bonds with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Both applicants enlarged on bail: personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the lower court.

Narendra Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11161/2024

¶3

Vinod S/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Khichan, Police Station Phalodi, Dist. Phalodi, Rajasthan. (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Phalodi)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10608/2024 Narendra S/o Babulal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Khichan Police Thana Phalodi, Ditst. Phalodi.

¶10

----Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶13

----Respondent

¶14

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Bhanu PratapInda
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Narendra Gehlot,PP

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT Order

¶16

04/09/2024

¶17

The instant bail applications have been filed by the applicants under Section 483 B.N.S.S. The applicants have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 288/2024 registered at Police Station Phalodi, District Phalodi for the offence(s) under Section 303(2) of BNS.

¶18

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. The case is exclusively triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate. The

¶19

[CRLMB-11161/2024]

¶20

(2 of 2)

¶21

applicants are behind the bars since one and a half month. The trial may take long time to conclude. Thus, learned counsel submitted that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.

¶22

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶23

Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accusedapplicants on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-applicants Vinod S/o Kheta Ram and Narendra S/o Babulal arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided they 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 lower court for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶26

116-117--Jatin/-

Narendra v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra 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

Rakesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Narendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurjant Singh @ Janta Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sahil Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahaveer Vs State of Rajasthan

Virma Ram Vs State of Rajasthan