Allowed

Sneha Dey W/O Honey Goyal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Jan 2024CRLMB/20/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Section 439 CrPC by a female accused in an FIR under Sections 341, 323 and 304 IPC arising from her father-in-law's accidental death. Noting the parties' compromise and custody period, without commenting on merits, the court allowed bail on a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to appearing before the trial court.

Sneha Dey W/O Honey Goyal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:2198]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 20/2024

¶4

Sneha Dey W/o Honey Goyal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Pehar Makan No. 150, Jhulelal First Colony, Vishal Medical Ke Paas, Jaisinghpura Khor, Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Jaipur Jail)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Honey Goyal S/o Shri Latesh Goyal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o 7, Kund Road, Narayan Dham, Jaisinghpura Khor Jaipur City (North), Jaipur, Raj.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Vikas Jakhar Mr. Ravi Choudhary
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. M. K. Sheoran, PP
	Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh for Complainant

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order

¶12

12/01/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.376/2023 registered at Police Station Jai Singh Pura Khor, District Jaipur City (North) for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 304 of IPC.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that father-in-law of the petitioner lost his life in an unfortunate accident but on account of misunderstanding this false FIR has been lodged against the petitioner. He further submits that now parties have entered into compromise. He submits that petitioner is a female and is in custody since 19.12.2023. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JP:2198]

[CRLMB-20/2024]

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that offence under Section 304 of IPC has been found proved against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant does not oppose the bail application and he has no objection if this bail application is allowed.

¶19

I have considered the contentions.

¶20

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that petitioner is a female and also considering the fact that parties have entered into compromise as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶21

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Sneha Dey W/o Honey Goyal shall be released on bail provided she 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 she shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶23

GAUTAM JAIN /129

Sneha Dey W/O Honey Goyal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sneha Dey W/O Honey Goyal 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

Ramroop S/O Pyarelal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Neeraj Kumar @ Kala S/O Pappuram, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Singh S/O Dayal Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shahjeb S/O Mohammad Siddique Vs State of Rajasthan

Salim S/O Shakir Albi Vs State of Rajasthan

Manbhar Devi W/O Kaluram Vs State of Rajasthan