Allowed

Samay Singh S/O Ram Chand v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Mar 2024CRLMB/654/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed anticipatory bail applications filed by three accused-petitioners in connection with an FIR under various sections of the IPC. The court found injuries simple in nature and deemed custodial interrogation unnecessary, ordering release on bail with a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; petitioners released on bail subject to personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, on conditions of not leaving India without permission and not interf

Samay Singh S/O Ram Chand Vs the State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:11738]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 654/2024

¶4

Samay Singh S/o Ram Chand, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Badoli, P.s. And Tehsil Laxmangarh, Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Roop Singh S/o Amar Chand, R/o Badoli, Laxmangarh, Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1565/2024

¶11

1. Radhey Shyam @ Radhey S/o Samay Singh, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Badoli, P.s. And Tehsil Laxmangarh, Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶12

Lal Singh S/o Samay Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Badoli, P.s. And Tehsil Laxmangarh, Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶13

----Accused-Petitioners

¶14

Versus

¶15

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶16

----Respondent

¶17

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Ashish Sharma
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Babulal Nasuna, PP,
		Mr. Surendra Singh

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶19

Order

¶20

07/03/2024

¶21

Apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No. 181/2023 registered at Police Station Laxmangarh, District Alwar for the offence(s) under Sections 143, 323, 324 341, 354 and 452

[2024:RJ-JP:11738]

[CRLMB-654/2024]

(2 of 3)

of IPC, the accused-petitioners have preferred this anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶26

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submit that accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case. He further submits that the other co-accused Ram Chandra and Narmada have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court. He submits that the injury sustained to injured Tej Singh was found to be simple in nature. There is a previous enmity between the parties and accused-petitioners have also lodged a cross-case against the complainant. He further submits that custodial investigation of the petitioners is not required. Therefore, anticipatory bail of the accused-petitioners may be allowed.

¶27

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the respondent(s) vehemently oppose the anticipatory bail application. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the accusedpetitioner Samay Singh has caused injuries to the injured Tej Singh and is also having criminal antecedents, therefore, the anticipatory bail applications of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed.

¶28

Heard and perused the case diary.

¶29

Considering the fact that the injuries sustained to Tej Singh were found to be simple in nature and other co-accused Ram Chandra and Radhey Shyam have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the learned trial Court. The custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioners is not required, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioners.

¶30

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail applications under Section

[2024:RJ-JP:11738]

[CRLMB-654/2024]

(3 of 3)

438 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioners namely- 1. Samay Singh S/o Ram Chand, 2.

¶35

Radhey Shyam @ Radhey S/o Samay Singh, and 3. Lal Singh S/o Samay Singh, in connection with FIR No. 181/2023 registered at Police Station Laxmangarh, District Alwar, they shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting OfÏcer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶36

(i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police ofÏcer as and when required;

¶37

(ii) that the petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police ofÏcer, and

¶38

(iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶39

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶40

Keshav/175-176

Samay Singh S/O Ram Chand v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samay Singh S/O Ram Chand v. the 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

Gaurishankar Sharma S/O Shri Brijkishore Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Roberto Della Valle Vs State

Sanjay Vs State

Kumarchand S/O Mangalram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Sumit S/O Raj Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhanwar Lal Meena S/O Chauthmal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan