High CourtsSingle Bench

Manoj Kumar vs State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 15 July 2010 · Citation: (2010) 07 RAJ CK 0081

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammad Rafiq, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 · Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 — Section 19, 54, 54A, 58A(F)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 268 words

Mohammad Rafiq, J.—Heard learned Counsel for petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

2.

Contention of the learned Counsel for petitioner is that this is first offence of the petitioner. The alleged offence Under Sections 19/54, 54A and 58A(F) of the Rajasthan Excise Act is triable by the Magistrate of Ist class. The maximum sentence for the said offence is three years. Petitioner undertakes not to repeat such offence in future again.

3.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

4.

Considering the submissions made at the bar, the nature of accusation, the materials on record and all other facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

5.

In the result, this bail application u/s 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Manoj Kumar S/o Shishpal shall be released on bail in FIR No. 5/10-11 at Excise Police Station Kishangarh, District Ajmer for offence Under Sections 19/54, 54A and 58A(F) of the Rajasthan Excise Act on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing until conclusion of the trial with the stipulation that he shall not repeat such offence in future and in case, he is again found committing similar offence, the bail granted to him would liable to be cancelled by the court below itself at the instance of the prosecution.