Allowed

Sunil @ Ankit @ Leeladhar @ Kaliya S/O Magharam v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Oct 2024CRLMB/8097/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed bail application under S. 483 BNSS for accused confined since May 16, 2024 in case triable by first class magistrate, directing release on personal bond with two sureties without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Sunil @ Ankit @ Leeladhar @ Kaliya S/O Magharam Vs State… — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:41754]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8097/2024

¶4

Sunil @ Ankit @ Leeladhar @ Kaliya S/o Magharam, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Thathawata, Police Station Ratangarh District Churu (Rajasthan) (Accused Presently Confined In District Jail, Jhunjhunu).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arpan Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakad, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶11

Order

¶12

01/10/2024

¶13

This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 81/2024 registered at Police Station Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu for offence u/S 380 IPC.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Public Prosecutor.

¶15

Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the accused petitioner is in custody since 16.05.2024 and the offence alleged against the accused petitioner is triable by First Class Magistrate.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application.

[2024:RJ-JP:41754]

[CRLMB-8097/2024]

(2 of 2)

Taking into consideration the allegations against the accusedpetitioner so also the fact that the accused petitioner is in custody since 16.05.2024 and the offence alleged against the him is triable by First Class Magistrate, this Court, without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of this case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only), together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶23

GAURAV SRIVASTAVA /35

Sunil @ Ankit @ Leeladhar @ Kaliya S/O Magharam v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil @ Ankit @ Leeladhar @ Kaliya S/O Magharam 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

Nurul Ishlam S/O Abdul Jabbar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mayank S/O Shri Dinesh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemraj Meena S/O Shri Ramkaran Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Devendra Singh S/O Pyare Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Hira Lal Saini S/O Shri Onkar Mal Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Sanjay Dhankad S/O Narayan Singh Dhankhad, Vs State of Rajasthan