Allowed

Bharat Singh S/O Meetha Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Feb 2024CRLMB/772/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a bail application for the appellant accused in a case involving IPC offences 143, 341, and 323. Considering the initial medical opinion of simple injuries and the completed investigation, the court granted bail with a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The accused petitioner Bharat Singh was enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Bharat Singh S/O Meetha Lal Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:6825]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 772/2024

¶4

Bharat Singh S/o Meetha Lal, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Hingotiya, Police Station Sadar Gangapur City. (Presently Confined In District Jail, Gangapur City).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Rajneesh Gupta
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. N. S. Gurjar, PP
	Mr. Pushpendra Kumar

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

09/02/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner Bharat Singh. The accusedpetitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.261/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar, Gangapur City, District Gangapur City for the offence(s) under Sections 143, 341 & 323 of the IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accusedpetitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Initially, the injuries inflicted to the injured Radha Mohan at his head was opined to be simple and sharp. Later on, same injuries have been reported, “may be dangerous to life, if not treated”. He submits that accused-petitioner also instituted a cross FIR against the complainant and petitioner also sustained injuries. The accusedpetitioner is in custody from 10.01.2024. The investigation against

[2024:RJ-JP:6825]

[CRLMB-772/2024]

(2 of 3)

the accused-petitioner has already been completed. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.

¶19

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the respondent vehemently oppose the bail application.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent argues that due to the assault, Radha Mohan suffered total 09 injuries, out of that, two injuries were inflicted at parietal anteromedially and parietal posterior medially. Similarly, other injured Chandan have sustained total 11 injuries at his various body parts. He also submits that due to injuries caused by the accused-petitioner, injured Radha Mohan remained hospitalized. He further submits that Medical Jurist specifically opined that injuries may be dangerous to life, if not treated. Therefore, considering the injuries caused to Radha Mohan and Chandan, the bail application of the present petitioner may be dismissed.

¶21

Heard and perused the case diary.

¶22

Initially, the injuries caused to Radha Mohan at his head was opined to be simple and sharp in nature and injuries No.3 and 4 were opined to be grievous in nature. Later on, in the second investigation, the concerned doctor has opined that the injuries may be dangerous to life, if not treated. The injuries caused to the other injured Chandan were opined to be not on the vital part and out of 11 injuries, one injury at his finger was found to be grievous in nature.

¶23

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that nature of injuries sustained to injured Radha Mohan and so also that the first

[2024:RJ-JP:6825]

[CRLMB-772/2024]

(3 of 3)

opinion, they were opined to be simple and sharp in nature and accused-petitioner is in custody from 10.01.2024, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Bharat Singh S/o Meetha Lal in connection with FIR No.261/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar, Gangapur City, District Gangapur City shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶29

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶30

92-Rahul Joshi

Bharat Singh S/O Meetha Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Singh S/O Meetha Lal 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

Asloop S/O Rehmat Vs State of Rajasthan

Laxman Kumawat S/O Chhitarmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Gunesh Meena S/O Hetram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Sahdev Gurjar S/O Sundaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Kumar S/O Late Shri Tarachand Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishan Kumar Dhenwal S/O Ghasee Ram Vs State of Rajasthan