SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Raj) 1560

H.R.PANWAR
INDRAJ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.P.S.Choudhary, M.K.GARG

Judgment

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public prosecutor for the State. This is third bail application. While rejecting the earlier bail application, the petitioner was granted liberty to file a fresh bail application after the statement of prosecutrix is recorded by the trial court.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the statement of prosecutrix PW-2. I have carefully gone through the statement of prosecutrix PW-2 as also the documents Ex. D-1 to D-11, letters said to have been written by the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix, in her statement, admitted that the letters bear her handwriting. Be that as it may, without commenting on the merit of the case which may prejudice the case of either party at the trial, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the oral arguments advanced by the counsel for parties, I think it just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail.

( 3 ) ACCORDINGLY, this third bail application filed under Sec. 439 cr. P. C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Indraj S/o Mani Ram be released on bail in FIR No. 184/05 P. S. Sangeria, district hanumangarh, provided he

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top