SHAHAJAHAN S/O HANIF v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: GANESH RAM MEENA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2024-12-06. SHAHAJAHAN S/O HANIF v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2024:RJ-JP:50227] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14356/2024 Shahajahan S/o Hanif, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Jaitalka, Police Station Punhana, District Nunhu, Mewat, Haryana. (At Present Confined At District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14823/2024 Yusuf S/o Maujkhan, R/o Gram Bilakpur, Police Station Firojpur Jhirka, District Nuh Mewat (Haryana) (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umesh Dixit Mr. Anoop Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 06/12/2024 1. The accused-petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 483 B. N. S. S. arising out of F. I. R. No.
396/2024 registered with the Police Station Sadar Dausa, District Dausa for offence under Sections 14, 19, 54 & 54(A) of Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. [2024:RJ-JP:50227] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14356/2024] 2. Counsels for the accused-petitioners submit that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsels further submit that except the present case, no other case is pending against the present accused-petitioners and the alleged offences are triable by the Magistrate. Counsels also submit that the accused-petitioners are in custody for last more than one month and trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, the accused-petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made by counsels for the accused-petitioners. 4. Considered the submissions made at bar so also perused the material available on record. 5.
Having considered the submissions made by learned counsels for the accused-petitioners so also the fact that except the present case, no other case is pending against the accused-petitioners and the alleged offences are triable by the Magistrate and the accused-petitioners are in custody for last more than one month, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail. 6. 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 [2024:RJ-JP:50227] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14356/2024] satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court or any other Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. Registry is directed to place a copy of this order in connected file. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /14-15
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.