Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 2]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Vinod @ Vikki Meena S/O Lalaram vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 February, 2023

Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4287/2022
Vinod @ Vikki Meena S/o Lalaram, R/o Daulatpura, Ps Harmada,
Dist. Jaipur.
                                                                  ----Appellant
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)          :    Mr. Anirudh Tyagi, Adv.
For Respondent(s)         :    Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP



    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

                                    Order

13/02/2023

     The present bail application has been filed under Section 438

Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.71/2018 registered at Police

Station Renwal, Jaipur (Rural) for the offence(s) under Sections

323, 341, 342, 365, 376-D and 143 IPC (During investigation,

offence was found to have been made out under Sections 143,

323, 341, 365, 308, 342 IPC).

     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He

further submits that co-accused Samundra Singh and Roshan

Singh have already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court vide orders dated 06.02.2020 and 16.05.2019

passed in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.127/2020 and S.B. Criminal

Appeal No.835/2019 respectively. He further submits that the

petitioner has no concerned with the alleged offence and nothing




                    (Downloaded on 16/02/2023 at 01:00:02 AM)
                                                                         (2 of 2)                    [CRLMB-4287/2022]



                                   is to be recovered from him. Hence, the petitioner be enlarged on

                                   anticipatory bail.

                                         Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments

                                   advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that

                                   petitioner is absconding and challan was filed against him under

                                   Section 299 Cr.P.C. So, the present bail application is not

                                   maintainable. So far as the bail granted to other co-accused

                                   persons is concerned, learned Public Prosecutor submits that they

                                   were granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., whereas the present

                                   bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

                                         I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

                                   counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I do not consider it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

Hence, the anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner stands dismissed.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Seema /137 (Downloaded on 16/02/2023 at 01:00:02 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)