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

SHRAVAN SINGH SODHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB 4717/2022



Advocates:
['JHAVAR PRAKASH CHHANGANI', '', 'NEETA CHHANGANI', 'PP']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR.

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 4717/2022

Shravan Singh Sodha S/o Shri Laxman Singh, Aged About 38

Years, R/o Village Badli, Police Station Bajju, District Bikaner,

(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner).

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. J.P. Chhangani.

Ms Neetu Chhangani.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

13/04/2022

The present second bail application has been filed under

Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in

connection with F.I.R. No. 525/2017, Police Station Nokha, District

Bikaner for the offences under Section 147, 148, 302, 302/149,

364, 364/149, 449, 449/149 IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of

the petitioner has not been reflected in the FIR registered by

Suresh. He further submits that the case of the present petitioner

is on identical footing to the co-accused person Subhash and

Roshan Lal who have been enlarged on bail by this court.

(2 of 2)

[CRLMB-4717/2022]

Per contra, learned public prosecutor submits that petitioner

was identified by Suresh during the identification parade and

name of the present petitioner is reflected in the statement of

Suresh who is an eye witness and lodger of the FIR.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of

the offence and also considering the fact that case of the

petitioner is not similar to the case of co-accused Subhash and

Roshan Lal, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439

Cr.P.C. to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the application preferred by the petitioner under

Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

15-KashishS/-

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 Back to top