Disposed

Pappusingh S/O Biram Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 May 2025CRLR/801/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Convict sought extension of time to comply with appellate court's direction to furnish sureties and pay costs under probation provisions after conviction upheld in appeal. Court extended the compliance period by 30 days from the order and disposed of the revision petition.

What did the court decide?

Time to furnish surety bonds and pay Rs. 1,000/- investigation costs extended by 30 days from date of order.

Pappusingh S/O Biram Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:21688]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 801/2025

¶4

Pappusingh S/o Biram Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Deoria, P.s. Bhinay District Ajmer, Rajasthan (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶10

: Mr. Pradeep Sharma, Adv. : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakad, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order

¶12

22/05/2025

¶13

/kkjk 5 ifjlhek vf/kfu;e ds vkosnu ij lquk x;kA

¶14

vkosnu esa of.kZr dkj.k o izLrqr rdksZa dks e/;utj j[krs gq, vkosnu Lohdkj dj fuxjkuh ;kfpdk izLrqr djus esa gq, foyEc dks ekQ fd;k tkrk gSA

¶15

fo}ku vfrfjDr eq[; U;kf;d eftLVªsV la[;k&1] dsdM+h }kjk fu;fer vkijkf/kd izdj.k la[;k&612@2010 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 06-04-2015 ds ek/;e ls vfHk;qDr@;kph dks /kkjk 332 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vijk/k esa ,d o"kZ ds lk/kkj.k dkjkokl o 1]000@&:i;s ds vFkZn.M o vne vnk;xh ,d ekg ds vfrfjDr lk/kkj.k dkjkokl ls] /kkjk 353 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vijk/k esa N% ekg ds lk/kkj.k dkjkokl o 500@&:i;s ds vFkZn.M o vne vnk;xh 15 fnu ds vfrfjDr lk/kkj.k dkjkokl ls rFkk /kkjk 3 ih-Mh-ih-ih- ,DV ds vijk/k esa ,d o"kZ ds lk/kkj.k dkjkokl o 1]000@&:i;s vFkZn.M o vne vnk;xh ,d ekg ds vfrfjDr lk/kkj.k dkjkokl ls nf.Mr fd;k x;k] ftlds fo:) vfHk;qDr }kjk vihy izLrqr dh xbZ] ftl ij fo}ku vij ftyk U;k;k/kh'k la[;k&1]

[2025:RJ-JP:21688]

[CRLR-801/2025]

(2 of 2)

dsdM+h }kjk fu;fer QkStnkjh vihy la[;k&27@2015 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 05-10-2024 ds ek/;e ls mijksDr nks"kfl)h dks ;Fkkor j[krs gq, iq"V fd;k rFkk n.Mkns'k dks vikLr djrs gq, /kkjk 4 vijk/kh ifjoh{kk ds izko/kkuksa dk ykHk nsrs gq, 30 fnu esa vkns'kkuqlkj tekur eqpyds is'k djs rFkk 1]000@&:i;s vfHk;kstu O;; tek djkus dk vkns'k fn;k x;kA

¶20

vihyh; U;k;ky; o fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds vkns'k dks pqukSrh nsrs gq, ;g fuxjkuh ;kfpdk izLrqr dh xbZ gSA

¶21

fo}ku vf/koDrk vfHk;qDr dk fuosnu gS fd ;|fi vk{ksfir fu.kZ; dks muds }kjk pqukSrh nh xbZ gS ijarq vihyh; U;k;ky; ds vkns'kkuqlkj 30 fnu esa tekur eqpyds izLrqr ugha fd;s tk lds rFkk 1]000@&:i;s vfHk;kstu O;; tek ugha djk;k tk ldk gS vkSj bl dkj.k ls orZeku le; esa vfHk;qDr vfHkj{kk esa gksrs gq, ltk Hkqxr jgk gS] vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk tks 30 fnu dh vof/k fu/kkZfjr dh xbZ Fkh] mls foLrkfjr fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA

¶22

blds foijhr fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd }kjk fof/klEer vkns'k ikfjr fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA

¶23

laiw.kZ ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks ns[krs gq, vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk 'krksZa dh ikyuk djus ds laca/k esa tks 30 fnu dh vof/k fu;r dh xbZ Fkh] mls vkt ls 30 fnu esa iw.kZ djus o ikyuk djus dk vkns'k nsrs gq, le;kof/k dk foLrkj fd;k tkrk gS vkSj bl mikarj.k ds lkFk fopkj.k U;k;ky; rFkk vihyh; U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dh iqf"V djrs gq, ;g fuxjkuh ;kfpdk Lohdkj dj fuLrkfjr dh tkrh gS rFkk vU; dksbZ vkosnu ;fn yafcr gks] rks os Hkh mDrkuqlkj fuLrkfjr fd;s tkrs gSaA

¶24

dk;kZy; dks funsZ'k fn;k tkrk gS fd bl vknsf'kdk dh izfr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds vfHkys[k ds lkFk vfoyEc fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks izsf"kr dh tkosA

¶25

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J

¶26

DINESH KUMAWAT /104

Pappusingh S/O Biram Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappusingh S/O Biram 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

Kamlesh Kumar Vs State

Hanuman Sahai Son of Shri Kalyan Sahai Vs State of Rajasthan

Indraj S/O Prem Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rattaram and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Imammuddin Son of Nasru (Bhusawaria) Vs Haneef Urf Hallo Son of Yasin

Nageshwar Soni Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.