Allowed

Vimlesh W/O Lakhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Sept 2024CRLMB/9107/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 B.N.S.S. on behalf of two accused persons in connection with an FIR for IPC offences. The petitioners were to furnish a bond with sureties and abide by standard conditions including appearance for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each and complying with specified conditions.

Vimlesh W/O Lakhan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Anticipatory Bail | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:38193]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9107/2024

¶4

Vimlesh W/o Lakhan Singh, R/o Jotroli, Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur.

¶5

Kamlesh W/o Sukhveer, R/o Jotroli, Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Timan Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Tiwari, P.P.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

¶12

Order

¶13

09/09/2024

¶14

The present bail application has been filed under Section 482 B.N.S.S. on behalf of the accused-petitioners in connection with FIR No.533/2023 registered at Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur for the offence(s) under Section(s) 323, 341, 504, 324, 325, 308 & 34 of IPC.

¶15

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have nothing to do with the alleged offences. Counsel further submits that both the accused-petitioners are ladies and other coaccused persons, namely Laakhan Singh & Sukhveer Singh have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court. Counsel also submits that the injury caused by Vimlesh to Kanchan (mother of injured) was simple in nature. Their custodial interrogation would not be required for any purpose.

[2024:RJ-JP:38193]

[CRLMB-9107/2024]

(2 of 2)

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶20

Having considered the overall allegations leveled in the FIR, contentions made by the counsel for the accused-petitioners & taking into account the totality of facts & circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners.

¶21

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. The S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer, Police Station Rudawal, District Bharatpur, in F.I.R. No. 533/2023 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners Vimlesh W/o Lakhan Singh & Kamlesh W/o Sukhveer, 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 Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶22

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

¶23

(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 officer, and

¶24

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

¶25

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶26

SAURABH /302

Vimlesh W/O Lakhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimlesh W/O Lakhan Singh 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

Chhagansingh S/O Shri Kamal Singh, Vs Vishnu Kumar Singhal S/O Shri Badriprashad

Bapu @ Bapulal S/O Jagnnath Vs Superintending Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited

Kishangopal Son of Shri Satyanarayan/Ramnarayan, Vs Modulal Son of Chitarlal

Mohd Jafar S/O Late Mohd. Abdul Gaffar Vs Smt. Afroj W/O Shri Mohd. Jafar D/O Late Shri Amil Khan

Mahaveer S/O Makkhan Lal Vs Madan Lal S/O Kanhaiya

Kailash Chand and Ors. Vs Vaidh Madan Gopal Thr Lrs