Allowed

Vishal S/O Pappu v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Jan 2024CRLMB/73/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court allowed regular bail application for two accused petitioners falsely implicated in IPC offences. Court ordered release on personal bond with sureties without needing to express opinion on merits or demerits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each to the satisfaction of trial court.

Vishal S/O Pappu Vs the State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:2565]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 73/2024

¶4

Vishal S/o Pappu, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Jagdishpuri Tan Mangarh, Police Station Ajitgarh, District Neemkathana. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Neemkathana District Sikar).

¶5

Arjunlal S/o Banshidhar Chandoliya, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Jagdishpuri Tan Mangarh, Police Station Ajitgarh, District Neemkathana. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Neemkathana District Sikar).

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikash Kumar Jakhar, Adv. For : Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, P.P. Respondent(s)

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

16/01/2024

¶14

This bail application has been filed by the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in FIR No.414/2023 registered at Police Station Ajitgarh, District Neem Ka Thana for the offence(s)

[2024:RJ-JP:2565]

(2 of 3)

[CRLMB-73/2024]

under Section(s) 448, 341, 323, 504, 427, 379 & 34 of IPC.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the accused-petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the accused-petitioners have been in judicial custody since long and the conclusion of the trial will take long time, hence the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the bail application.

¶21

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioners namely (1) Vishal S/o Pappu and (2) Arjunlal S/o Banshidhar Chandoliya shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioners shall appear before that Court on all subsequent

¶23

[2024:RJ-JP:2565]

¶24

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-73/2024]

¶25

dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do

¶26

so.

¶27

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J

¶28

YOGESH KUMAR /124

Vishal S/O Pappu v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal S/O Pappu 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

Moharsingh S/O Kajod Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran Hussain S/O Shri Sajid Hussain Vs State of Rajasthan

Himansh @ Himanshu Verma S/O Shri Kanwar Ajay Verma Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Rajesh S/O Shri Bhagwan Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ramniwas S/O Kishori Vs State of Rajasthan

Jai Prakash @ Pintoo S/O Shri Heeralal Vs State of Rajasthan