Allowed

Adnan Ahmed @ Bangali S/O Mohammad Tahir Ansari v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2024CRLMB/63/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for accused persons in a case involving Sections 457 and 380 IPC. The court considered the nature of the offence, lack of criminal antecedents, and period of custody, granting bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed subject to furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Adnan Ahmed @ Bangali S/O Mohammad Tahir Ansari Vs State… — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 63/2024

¶3

Adnan Ahmed @ Bangali S/o Mohammad Tahir Ansari, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Talhati Mohalla, Near Neelgaro Ki Masjid, Ward No. 6, Kaithun, Police Station Kaithun, District Kota (Rajasthan). (Presently Confined In Central Jail Kota)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 157/2024 Shahnawaj @ Shani S/o Nizamuddin, R/o Talhati Mohalla Nakkarkhana, Ward No. 6 Kaithun, District Kota Rural (Raj.). (Accused At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota).

¶10

----Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶13

----Respondent

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.K. Sheoran, PP

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶16

Order

¶17

09/01/2024

¶18

Petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶19

F.I.R. No. 509/2023 was registered at Police Station Kaithun, District Kota Rural for offences under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC.

¶20

It is contended by counsels for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been

¶21

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-63/2024]

¶22

implicated in this case. Counsels further submit that alleged offences are triable by magistrate. Counsels for the petitioners submit that recovery of Rs.50,00,000/- have already been made and no further recovery is required from the petitioners. They further submit that there are no criminal antecedents of petitioners. They further submit that petitioners are in custody sinc e 29.11.2023 and trial will take considerable time. Counsels contend that further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed these bail applications and submits that at the instance of the petitioners Rs.50,00,000/- have been recovered.

¶24

I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that alleged offences are triable magistrate; absence of criminal antecedents of similar nature; and period of custody, but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.

¶25

These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they shall appear before that Court and any court

¶26

[CRLMB-63/2024]

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

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

¶29

It is made clear that the accused petitioners shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence on first Monday of every month in the concerned police station.

¶30

If any breach of these conditions 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 them by this Court.

¶31

Learned trial magistrate is directed to ensure the fact that no other case is pending against the petitioners before accepting bail bonds.

¶32

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶33

ANAND TANWAR /83-84

Adnan Ahmed @ Bangali S/O Mohammad Tahir Ansari v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adnan Ahmed @ Bangali S/O Mohammad Tahir Ansari 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

Vinod Kushwah S/O Sh. Sitaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Chanchal Kumari W/O Shri Lokesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Jatin S/O Subhash Vs State of Rajasthan

Noshad @ Noshi @ Noshya Vs State

Sunil S/O Ramesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gindraj S/O Shri Goverdhan Vs State of Rajasthan