Allowed

Gopiram S/O Ramkaran v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Mar 2024CRLMB/2401/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail filed by the accused-petitioner apprehending arrest under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The injuries sustained by the complainant were simple in nature, and a cross FIR was pending.

What did the court decide?

Evolved anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner who has to furnish a personal bond in Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each in the sum of Rs.50,000 along with two sureties of Rs.25,000 eac

Gopiram S/O Ramkaran Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:13458]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2401/2024

¶4

Gopiram S/o Ramkaran, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Kalmiya, Police Station Karwar, District Bundi (Raj.).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Jain. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order

¶11

18/03/2024

¶12

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the accused-petitioner against the order dated 16.02.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nainwa, District Bundi, Rajasthan under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.0011/2024, registered at Police Station Karwar, District Bundi for the offences under Sections 341, 308, and 34 of IPC.

¶13

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submitted that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner-Gopi Ram and complainant of this case Bhoja Ram are real brothers, there is land dispute between the brothers and due to this dispute, both the brothers got into an altercation, in which both of them sustained injuries. Learned counsel further submits that the present petitioner Gopi Ram has also lodged an FIR against Bhoja

[2024:RJ-JP:13458]

[CRLMB-2401/2024]

(2 of 3)

Ram which is FIR No.08/2024 at Police Station Karwar, District Bundi. He further submits that all the injuries sustained by the injured Bhoja Ram and his wife Smt. Mathra have been found simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. Therefore, the matter does not travel beyond the offence under Section 323 IPC. He further submits that co-accused Vimla has already been enlarged on bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the trial Court vide order dated 5th February, 2024 and therefore, the accused-petitioner be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner should not be granted benefit of bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶19

There is allegation against the present petitioner and his wife Smt. Vimla Bai for causing injuries to his brother Bhoja Ram and his wife Smt. Mathra. Injuries found on Bhoja Ram and Smt. Mathra are simple in nature, caused by a blunt weapon. A crossFIR has also been lodged by the present petitioner against the injured Bhoja Ram, which is pending investigation. Moreover, the co-accused Smt. Vimla Bai has already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court. In these facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of accusedpetitioner Gopiram S/o Ramkaran in connection with FIR

[2024:RJ-JP:13458]

[CRLMB-2401/2024]

(3 of 3)

No.0011/2024, registered at Police Station Karwar, District Bundi, the accused-petitioner shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO on the following conditions:-

¶25

(1) that the accused-petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before a police officer as and when required;

¶26

(2) that the accused-petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; and

¶27

(3) that the accused-petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶28

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR), J

¶29

Yogesh/262

Gopiram S/O Ramkaran v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopiram S/O Ramkaran 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

Mahendra Singh Rajawat S/O Bhanwar Singh Vs Chhitar Lal S/O Ladu Lal

Mohanlal Vs New Iindia Insurance

Prakash Meena Vs New India Insurance

Amit S/O Shri Dayaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajveer Singh Tanwar S/O Shri Sugan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jaswant Yogi @ Vishal @ Ishu Yogi S/O Sadanand Yogi Vs State of Rajasthan