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

2022 Supreme(Raj) 1796

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Gaytri Devi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Vineet Jain, Advocate, S. K. Bhati, Advocate, Mohan Ram Choudhary, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - Lawyers are not physically appearing in the Court in view of the unprecedented situation being faced by the country due to pandemic of novel corona virus (COVID-19).

2. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.193/2021, Police Station Bigod, District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 354, 452 & 306 of the I.P.C.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is on going dispute between the petitioner and the complainant party & getting frustrated of the same, Kaushalya Devi poured kerosene on her body and burnt herself. He further submits that there is no evidence on record which shows that the petitioner instigated or abetted Kaushalya Devi to commit suicide. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor & learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as also the present situation of t

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