Pooja Wife Of Shri Amarsingh vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1440 Raj/2

[2023/RJJP/001537]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

 S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 758/2023

Pooja Wife Of Shri Amarsingh, Resident Of Longtipura, Police
Station Kudgaon, District Karauli (Raj.) ( At Present Confined In
District Jail Karauli)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                 ----Respondent

Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 819/2023 Kumari Rekha Meena Daughter Of Kamal Meena, Resident Of Nagalllat, Police Station Todabheem, Dsitrict Karauli (Raj.) ( At Present Confined In District Jail Karauli)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1568/2023 Lovekesh Kumar Meena @ Aasu Son Of Babulal Meena, Resident Of Bardala, Police Station Nadoti, District Karauli (Raj.) ( At Presnt In District Jail Karauli)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Sheshram Meena
                                Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadaun
For State                       Mr. Mahendra Meena, PP

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Judgment / Order 03/02/2023

[2023/RJJP/001537] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-758/2023]

1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 439

Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.543/2022 was registered at Police Station Karauli,

District Karauli for the offence/s mentioned therein.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that the

petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case as they have

nothing to do with the alleged incident. The petitioners are behind

the bars from the date of their arrest and no purpose will be

served in keeping them behind the bars. Further detention of the

petitioners is not warranted for interrogation and recovery

purposes. Trial of the case is likely to take considerable time.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed these bail

applications.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

petitioner(s) but without making any opinion on the merits and

demerits of the case, 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 he/she/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

he/she/each of them shall appear before that Court and any Court

to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of

[2023/RJJP/001537] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-758/2023]

hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

8. Registry is directed to place a copy of this order in the

connected files.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

ARTI SHARMA/138-140

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)