Allowed

Mahendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2024CRLMB/159/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for alleged offences under Sections 458, 394, 342 and 34 IPC. Court noted trial likely to take long time, found it suitable to enlarge petitioner on bail on a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial Judge.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:1250]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 159/2024

¶4

Mahendra Singh S/o Bhagwat Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Diver, P.s Diver District Rajsamand (Presently Lodged In District Jail Rajsamand)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. KuldeepSingh
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Abhishek Purohit,AGA

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

09/01/2024

¶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 accusedpetitioner. The requisite details of the matter are

¶14

tabulated herein below:

¶15

S.No.	Particulars	of the Case
1.	FIR Number	447/2023
2.	Concerned Police Station	Devgarh
3.	District	Rajsamand
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Under Sections 458, 394, 342 and 34 of the IPC
5.	Offences added,if any	-
6.	Date of passing of impugne order	d 20.12.2023

¶16

It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:1250]

[CRLMB-159/2024]

the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the 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 Public Prosecutor 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. 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 accusedpetitioner 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

126-divya/-

Mahendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Singh 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

Surajmal @ Maliya Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu Vs State of Rajasthan

Sheru @ Shyam Dev Vs State of Rajasthan

Poonam Vs State of Rajasthan

Bannaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Sharwan Vs State of Rajasthan