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) 1799

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Mangilal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
D.L. Rawlam, Advocate, Shrawan Bishnoi, 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 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with FIR No.120/2021, registered at Police Station Matoda, District Jodhpur for the offences punishable under Sections 376-D & 306 of IPC.

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

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge-sheet in the case has been filed. He submits that the petitioner and Mst. 'L' were in relationship and were regularly talking to each other on telephone. The call details are on record. He further submits that merely because the fact of relationship between the petitioner and Mst. 'L' came to the knowledge of her father, she got frightened and committed suicide. The conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time, therefore, he prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circum

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