Allowed

Imran Khan S/O Munna Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Dec 2024CRLMB/11004/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge bench allowed bail to the petitioner in connection with FIR registered for offences under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The court noted the existence of a friendship between the parties suggesting a possibility of false accusation, though it decided without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each.

Imran Khan S/O Munna Khan Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:50721]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11004/2024

¶4

Imran Khan S/o Munna Khan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Manihar Gali, Haveli Thank, Police Station Basedi, District Dholpur (Raj.). (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dholpur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Saini, Public Prosecutor

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶11

Order

¶12

10/12/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.625/2024 registered at Police Station Mansarovar, Jaipur City (South) for the offences under Sections 115(2), 79, 308(2) and 64(2)(m) of the BNS, 2023 lateron converted under Section 64(2)(m) & 79 of the BNS, 2023.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the challan papers.

¶16

On consideration of submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and perusal of the statement of the witness, namely, Jaisingh, the Manager of Hotel recorded under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S., it is revealed that the accused-petitioner and the prosecutrix used to visit and stay at Hotel on various

[2024:RJ-JP:50721]

[CRLMB-11004/2024]

(2 of 2)

occasions without there being any complaint or resistence by the complainant/prosecutrix. This Court has also gone through the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. which speaks about the friendship between the accusedpetitioner and the prosecutrix. In such circumstances, there is possibility of registration of a case based on false and fabricated story because of some dispute between both of them, cannot be ruled out.

¶21

Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above in connection with the aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶23

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶24

Ashish Kumar /111

Imran Khan S/O Munna Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran Khan S/O Munna Khan 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

Praddhuman S/O Kishangopal Vs Durga Shankar S/O Mangilal

Praddhuman S/O Kishangopal Vs Rakesh Vaishnav S/O Chhitardas

Vishnu S/O Nehanulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Chand S/O Sundar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranveer Singh S/O Shri Nand Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Satish Kumar S/O Shri Ramjilal Vs State of Rajasthan