Allowed¶14

Mausam Ali @ Mausam S/O Asru v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Feb 2025CRLMA/76/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Name-correction application, Rajasthan HC Jaipur, 13/02/2025, Justice Anil Kumar Upman; petitioner Mausam Ali @ Mausam (Kaman, Deeg); correction of father's name 'Asru' to 'Amru' in bail rejection order dated 16.01.2025 of S.B. Crimnal Misc. Bail Application No.13197/2024; trial court rectification order dated 18.01.2025; application allowed; corrective order made part and parcel of order dated 16.01.2025; counsel: Akrati Mathur for Amit Singh Shekhawat (petitioner); J.P. Tiwari PP (State of Rajasthan); no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; father's name of petitioner Mausam Ali @ Mausam to be read as 'Amru' instead of 'Asru' in the order dated 16.01.2025; present order treated as part and parcel of that order. ¶14

Mausam Ali @ Mausam S/O Asru Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 76/2025

¶3

Mausam Ali @ Mausam S/o Asru, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ladlaka, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

	Versus
State Of Rajasthan, T For Petitioner(s)	hrough Pp --- : Ms. Akrati Mathur for Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. J.P. Tiwari,PP

¶6

----Respondent

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶8

Order

¶9

13/02/2025

¶10

The instant application has been filed on behalf of petitionerapplicant seeking correction in the order dated 16.01.2025 passed in S.B. Crimnal Misc. Bail Application No.13197/2024.

¶11

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the father’s name of the petitioner was wrongly mentioned as ‘Asru’ instead of ‘Amru’ in the order rejecting bail passed by the learned trial court. This error has now been rectified vide order dated 18.01.2025 passed by the learned court below. She submits that while filing the memo of this bail application, father’s name of the petitioner was mentioned as ‘Asru’ instead of ‘Amru’ in order to match the particulars with the order of the trial court. She thus, prays that the instant application may be allowed and the error in the name of father of the petitioner may be rectified.

¶12

[CRLMA-76/2025]

¶13

(2 of 2)

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner and perusing the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the prayer made in this application is justified. Accordingly, the instant application is hereby allowed. The father’s name of the petitioner Masuam Ali @ Mausam shall be read as ‘Amru’ instead of ‘Asru’ in the order dated 16.01.2025. The order shall be treated part and parcel of the order dated 16.01.2025.

¶15

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶16

LALIT MOHAN /752

Mausam Ali @ Mausam S/O Asru v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mausam Ali @ Mausam S/O Asru v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohit Swami S/O Shri Durgalal Swami Vs State of Rajasthan

Aadesh Kumar S/O Shri Ghanshyam, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ratiram S/O Late Bhura, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sawan S/O Radheyshyam Vs State of Rajasthan

Salim Kureshi @ Pappu S/O Shri Makkhan Kureshi Vs State of Rajasthan

Samay Singh S/O Shri Ramphool Vs State of Rajasthan