Allowed

Dayaram S/O Shri Kanwarlal, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 May 2024CRLMB/4505/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C., holding it a fit case after observing similarity in facts with co-accused previously enlarged on bail, directing release upon arrest and furnishing bond.

What did the court decide?

Accused-petitioner directed to be released on bail with two sureties totaling Rs. 25,000 and a personal bond of Rs. 50,000.

Dayaram S/O Shri Kanwarlal, Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:24662]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4505/2024

¶4

Dayaram S/o Shri Kanwarlal, Aged About 52 Years, R/o -Gram Ujoli, P. S. Kotkasim, District Khairthal -Tijara (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yashwant Kankhadia, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶11

Order

¶12

23/05/2024

¶13

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.279/2023, registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Bhiwadi for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341 & 506 IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that FIR No.279/2023 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Bhiwadi and for the same incident, a cross FIR has also been registered by the accused persons against the injured persons of this case bearing FIR No.280/2023 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Bhiwadi. Both the FIRs have been registered on the same date i.e. on 05.07.2023 and the injured persons of both the sides have sustained injuries. In this case, all injured persons except Smt.

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:24662]

[CRLMB-4505/2024]

Mukesh Devi have sustained simple injuries. The grievous head injury sustained by Smt. Mukesh Devi has been attributed to one Satisha w/o Dayaram which has been specifically mentioned in the FIR. The case of the present petitioner is not different from coaccused persons Amit, Govind and Ranjeet, who have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2312/2024 vide order dated 18.03.2024. He further submits that accused Dayaram has also sustained injuries and, therefore, the accused-petitioner be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶20

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that as per the statement of injured Mukesh Devi recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has specifically levelled the allegation of causing head injury to one Satisha, therefore, the case of the present petitioner is not different from that of Amit, Govind and Ranjeet, who have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2024 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2312/2024, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of accused-

[CRLMB-4505/2024]

[2024:RJ-JP:24662]

(3 of 3)

petitioner Dayaram S/o Shri Kanwarlal , in connection with FIR No.279/2023, registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Bhiwadi, 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:-

¶26

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

¶27

(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

¶28

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

¶29

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶30

MADAN/6

Dayaram S/O Shri Kanwarlal, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dayaram S/O Shri Kanwarlal, 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

Mangal Singh Vs Bhupendra Chaturvedi and Others

Kunwarpal Singh @ K.P. Singh S/O Thakur Das Vs the State of Rajasthan

Amit S/O Shri Dayaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar S/O Shri Ramprasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Devraj S/O Ramsingh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Hanuman S/O Moti Vs State of Rajasthan