Allowed

Devraj S/O Mathuralal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Jan 2024CRLMB/13834/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the third bail application of the petitioner accused in an affray case with charges of causing simple and grievous hurt, invoking sections 323, 34, 324, 325, 326 IPC, considering medical evidence and charge sheet status.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, conditioned on appearance on all subsequent dates in Trial Court and no involvement in similar offences.

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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 13834/2023

¶3

Devraj S/o Mathuralal, Village Amli P.s. Namana District Bundi, (At Present In Lodged In District Jail Bundi).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Pp

¶7

Gomda S/o Kalyan, R/o Aamli, P.s Namana Dist. Bundi.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raunak Singhvi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

04/01/2024

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that second bail application was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh after recording testimony of the medical expert. Now, medical expert has been examined as PW-11 and according to his testimony, all three grievous injuries have been found on non-vital part of the body. Hence, this third bail application has been filed.

¶14

F.I.R. No. 121/2021 was registered at Police Station Namana, District Bundi for offences under Sections 323, 341 & 34 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 326, 452 & 308 of IPC.

¶15

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody sinc e 3^rd November, 2021. He further submits that as per the

¶16

[CRLMB-13834/2023]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

testimony of the medical expert, all three grievous injuries have been found on non-vital part of the body. He also submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter and trial will take considerable time. Counsel contends that further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. Counsel further submits that two other cases have been registered against the petitioner for petty offences wherein petitioner has already been granted bail.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this bail application and submits that there is allegation against the petitioner for causing sharp injuries on the person of the injured and three fractures have been found on the body of injured.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and especially the fact that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; all the grievous injuries were found on non vital part of the injured person; and period of custody, but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the third bail application.

¶22

This third bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter

¶23

[CRLMB-13834/2023]

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

The accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail. If breach of this condition is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.

¶27

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶28

ANAND TANWAR /63

Devraj S/O Mathuralal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devraj S/O Mathuralal 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

Gulsher Mohmmad S/O Ali Sher, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Kumar Dangayach Son of Shri Sitaram Dangayach Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Rahisan D/O Jamshed, Vs State of Rajasthan

Saddam Hussain S/O Munna Khan @ Yusuf, Vs State of Rajasthan

Virendra Verma S/O Shri Madan Lal Verma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Piyush Rathod Son of Bhupendra Rathod Vs State of Rajasthan