Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
Dinesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12657 of 2020, 12658 of 2020, 12821 of 2020
Decided on : 05-01-2021
BAIL - Criminal Procedure - The court allowed the bail applications of the accused-petitioners based on the contentions put forth by their counsel and directed their release on bail with specific conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for an offense under Sections 458, 394 I.P.C. A similar test identification parade was not conducted, and the Public Prosecutor opposed the bail applications citing the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the contentions of both parties and deemed it proper to allow the bail applications, ultimately directing the release of the accused-petitioners on bail with specific conditions.
Issues: The issues involved the consideration of bail applications for the accused-petitioners in relation to the offense under Sections 458, 394 I.P.C., and the contentions raised by their counsel and the Public Prosecutor.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the contentions put forth by the petitioners' counsel, the absence of a test identification parade, and the opposition by the Public Prosecutor based on the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Final Decision: The bail applications were allowed, and the accused-petitioners were directed to be released on bail with specific conditions, including the furnishing of personal bonds and sureties, and the recording of conditions in the Village Crime Record Book.
JUDGMENT
Pankaj Bhandari, J. - Petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
2. F.I.R. No.154/2020 was registered at Police Station Jamaramgarh, District Jaipur (Raj.) for offence under Sections 458, 394 I.P.C.
3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that similarly situated co-accused have been enlarged on bail. No test identification parade was conducted.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed these bail applications. It is contended that petitioners have criminal antecedents.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioners, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.
7. These bail applications are, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them 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) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
8. A copy of this order be sent to concerned S.H.O. for recording this condition in the Village Crime Record Book so that in the event of petitoners' repeating offence, S.H.O. can move the Court for cancellation of bail.
9. A copy of this order be placed in connected files.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
