High CourtsSingle Bench

Sunil Singh And Ors vs State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 12 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 RAJ CK 0253

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 307, 332, 353
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1552 Of 2020
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

22 paragraphs · 431 words

The matter comes upon an application (Inward No. 01/2020) seeking deletion of the names of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 from the cause title.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The names of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Sunil Singh and Santosh Kumar,

respectively, are ordered to be deleted from the cause title of the present bail application. The bail application now survives qua the petitioner No. 3

â€" Rohit @ Chunnu Meghwal (Solanki) only. The amended cause title filed is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the bail application. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the

petitioner No. 3 who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No. 117/2019, Police Station Paroli, District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 332,

353 & 307/34 of I.P.C.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused, namely, Sarfaraj, Sunil Singh and Santosh Kumar have already been enlarged on bail

by this Court vide Orders dated 27.01.2020 and 04.02.2020, respectively. The case of the present petitioner â€" Rohit @ Chunnu Meghwal is not

distinguishable from the co-accused persons who have been enlarged on bail. He, therefore, prays that the present petitioner may also be enlarged on

bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application but he is unable to distinguish the case of the present petitioner vis-a-vis the case of the co-

accused persons who have been enlarged on bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced and the fact that the case of the

present petitioner is identical to the case of the co-accused aforesaid who have already been released on bail, this Court is of the opinion that the bail

application filed by the present petitioner deserves to be accepted.

Consequently, the present bail application qua petitioner No. 3 filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner -

Rohit @ Chunnu Meghwal (Solanki) S/o Kalu Meghwanshi arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 117/2019, Police Station Paroli, District Bhilwara

shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees

: Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing

and as and when called upon to do so.