Rajasthan High Court

CRLMB/16369/2023 of DHANNARAM S/O JAGGU Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 22 December 2023

JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16369/2023 Dhannaram S/o Jaggu, Aged About 81 Years, R/o Dhokar Tan Shyamgarh Police Station, Gokulpura, District Sikar (Raj.) (At Present Lodge At District Jail Sikar) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus 1.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16369/2023

Dhannaram S/o Jaggu, Aged About 81 Years, R/o Dhokar TanShyamgarh Police Station, Gokulpura, District Sikar (Raj.) (AtPresent Lodge At District Jail Sikar)

----Accused-Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

Respondent

2. Surjaram S/o Ganpat Ram,

3. Manisha D/o Surjaram,

4. Priyanka D/o Surjaram,

All R/o Dohkar, Gokulpura, Sikar.

----Victims/Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Dipti Jindal with Mr. Amit Jindal Mr. Amit Jindal For Respondent(s): Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, P.P.

Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYALJudgment / Order 22/12/2023

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIRNo.0005/2023 registered at Police Station Gokulpura, DistrictSikar for the offence(s) under Section(s) 147, 148, 149, 452,341, 323 & 307 IPC and later on for the offence(s) underSection(s) 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 323 & 308 IPC

Page 1 of 2

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has falselybeen implicated in this case. She submits that there are omnibusallegations against a large number of persons without any specificinjury attributed to the present accused-petitioner who is at anadvance age of 81 years. With regard to his criminal antecedents, learned counsel submits that barring one case, all other fivecriminal cases pertain to the period in between the years 1993-1998 and all six criminal cases registered against him involveminor offences. She submits that the petitioner is in custody since09.12.2023, investigation as against him is complete and prays forhis release on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learnedcounsel for the complainants opposed the bail application.

Taking into consideration the submissions advanced bylearned counsel for the petitioner, the material available in thecase diary including the statement of the injured Surjaram whichdoes not reflect attribution of any specific injury to the petitionerand especially, the very advance age of the petitioner; but,without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, thisCourt deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directedthat accused-petitioner Dhannaram S/o Jaggu shall be releasedon bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with afore-mentioned FIR registered at concerned Police Station, provided hefurnishes a personal bond in the sum ofRs.1,00,000/- (RupeesOne Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum ofRs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfactionof the trial court with the stipulation that he shall comply with allthe conditions laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead