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
7 paragraphs · 281 wordsManoj Kumar Garg, J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material available on record.
The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.01/2021 of Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sirohi for offence under Sections 498/A and 306 of IPC. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier bail was granted to the petitioner but he jumped the bail on 17.10.2022. Now the petitioner is in judicial custody since 25.04.2023. Counsel further assures this Court that in future, the petitioner will remain present on each and every date before the trial court and if he again jumps the bail then the indulgence of bail may not be extended to the petitioner.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner subject to the condition that he will appear before the trial court on each and every date, failing which Public Prosecutor may file application for cancellation of bail.
Accordingly, the bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Pepa Ram S/o Sh. Chuna Ram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.01/2021 of Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sirohi provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.