Allowed

Mohansingh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Feb 2024CRLMB/1136/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a bail application for an accused accused of theft alleged under Section 379 IPC. The court considered the offences triable by a magistrate and the potential for a delayed trial. The petitioner was granted bail on a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:5732]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1136/2024

¶4

Mohansingh S/o Shri Ummed Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Rooppura P.s Kuchaman City Dist. Dedwana - Kuchaman (Raj)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Om Prakash
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

05/02/2024

¶13

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are

¶14

tabulated herein below:

¶15

S.No.	Particulars of	the Case
1.	FIR Number	265/2023
2.	Concerned Police Station	Makrana
3.	District	Nagaur
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Under Section 379 of the IPC
5.	Offences added, if any	--
6.	Date of passingof impugned order	23.11.2023

¶16

It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that the offences alleged are triable by a Court of magistrate. No case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:5732]

[CRLMB-1136/2024]

accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

¶21

Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

¶22

I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record. The offences alleged are triable by a Court of magistrate. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

¶23

Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the 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.

¶24

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶25

81-Ashutosh/-

Mohansingh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohansingh 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

Uttama Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Arjun Vs State of Rajasthan

Shravan Kumar @ Vakil Vs State of Rajasthan

Pista Vs State of Rajasthan

Govind Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Harjinder Singh Vs State of Rajasthan