Allowed

Gajraj S/O Sh. Majbootsingh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Aug 2024CRLMB/7153/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench allowed bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and 483 BNSS for two accused. The court found that firearm injuries were specifically attributed to co-accused, allowing release upon furnishing of a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Accused-petitioners enlarged on bail provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge.

Gajraj S/O Sh. Majbootsingh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7153/2024

¶3

Gajraj S/o Sh. Majbootsingh, R/o Pech Wale Hanuyman Ji Ke Piche, Bajrang Colony, Dholpur, Police Station Kotwali, Dholpur. (Presently Accused In Judicial Custody At District Jail Dholpur).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8669/2024

¶10

Santram @ Sonti S/o Shri Jabarsingh, R/o Kaila Coloney, Dholpur Police Station Kotwali Dholpur.

¶11

(Accused Petitioner Is In Judicial Custody In District Jail, Dholpur Raj.)

¶12

----Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Abdul Sagir
	Mod. Shahid Hassan
	Mr. Sumit Kumar Jain
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, PP
	Mr. Shribhan Poswal

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶18

Order

¶19

01/08/2024

¶20

The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioners. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 182/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Dholpur for

¶21

[CRLMB-7153/2024]

¶22

(2 of 3)

¶23

the offence(s) under Sections 143, 323, 341, 504, 506 and 307 of IPC.

¶24

Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the petitioners have been falsely involved in this case. It is contended that allegation of causing fire-arm injuries to injured Ramkesh are specifically attributed to other co-accused. It is vehementally argued that Ramkesh sustained seven injuries on different body parts, out of which five injuries were found to be gun shot injuries. It is not alleged against the petitioners that they fired at Ramkesh. It is also contended that other co-accused Gurudev has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 13.06.2024 and case of the petitioners is not distinguishable from the case of co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail. Petitioners are in custody since long and trial of the case will take time, therefore, bail applications of the petitioners may be allowed.

¶25

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have vehementaly opposed the bail applications. It is contended that accused- petitioners alongwith other co-accused who fired at Ramkesh assaulted the injured Ramkesh, resulting into seven injuries. Role of the petitioners in the alleged offence has been specifically narrated by injured Ramkesh and other witnesses, therefore considering the nature of injuries sustained to injured Ramkesh, the bail applications of petitioners may be dismissed.

¶26

Heard and perused the charge-sheet.

¶27

From the perusal of the charge-sheet and statement of the witnesses, it is apparent that allegation of causing fire-arm injury to injured Ramkesh are against other co-accused i.e. Bhupendra,

¶28

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-7153/2024]

¶29

Jitendra and Hanuman Das. As a result of fire-arm injuries, Ramkesh sustained five injuries, apart from that, other two injuries are not caused by fire-arm.

¶30

Considering the above facts and without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶31

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners Gajraj S/o Sh. Majbootsingh and Santram @ Sonti S/o Shri Jabarsingh, in connection with FIR No. 182/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Dholpur shall be enlarged on bail provided both of them, furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶32

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶33

ashu /12-13

Gajraj S/O Sh. Majbootsingh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajraj S/O Sh. Majbootsingh 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

Anil Kumar S/O Ramniwas Vs Union of India

Mahesh Chand Jangid and Ors. Vs Smt Lada Jangid

Smt. Sunita Wife of Shri Sunil Kumar Daughter of Shri Bajranglal , Vs Sunil Kumar Son of Shri Ramchandra

Khem Chand @ Khema S/O Bhuri Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Fajju S/O Suppa Vs State of Rajasthan

Gyanchand S/O Bhuri Singh Vs State of Rajasthan