Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  


This Page To:

RAJ KUMAR V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN, decided on Tuesday, May 5, 2015.
[ In the High Court of Rajasthan, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3900 of 2015. ] 05/05/2015
Judge(s) : M.N. BHANDARI
Advocate(s) : Ashvin Garg. Virendra Godara, P.P.
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page

Judgments that may be related:-

  Shipra Banik Versus The Executive Officer & Others,   13/12/2017.  

  Geeta Devi Versus Seema & Others,   08/12/2017.  

  State of Guj Versus Sunilkumar I Thakar & Others,   08/12/2017.  

  Bharat Singh Versus Bharti,   07/12/2017.  

  The State of Rajasthan Through the Principal Secretary, Medical & Health Department & Others Versus Surendra Kumar Gurjar & Others,   06/12/2017.  

  Sahara India Parivar & Others Versus Rajinder Kumar,   06/12/2017.  

  Sushil Arora & Others Versus State,   05/12/2017.  

  Sk. Saber Ali @ Apel Versus The State of West Bengal,   05/12/2017.  

  Renu Rani Shrivastava & Another Versus New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Others,   30/11/2017.  

  Col Naraian Singh (Retd) Versus The Union of India Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi & Another,   29/11/2017.  

  St. Ann's English Medium School, Through its Principal Sr. Shaly Methew & Others Versus The State of Chhattisgarh, Represented by Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) & Others,   27/11/2017.  

  Nithya Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to the Government, Home Prohibition & Excise Dept, Chennai & Another,   27/11/2017.  

  M/S RSPL Limited Versus M/S S.K. Enterprises,   27/11/2017.  

  Ramswaroop Choudhary & Others Versus State of Rajasthan, Department of Home, Through Its Secretary & Others,   24/11/2017.  

  Jindal Steel & Power Limited, Through its Authorised Signatory (Indrapreet Singh, Manager ? CMG at Jindal Steel & Power Limited, Raigarh (C.G.) & Others Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Naya Raipur & Others,   24/11/2017.  

  Bajaj Resources Limited & Another Versus Goyal Herbals Private Limited & Others,   24/11/2017.  

  Sunaina Saini Versus Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd.-(A Government of Rajasthan Undertaking) Through Its Chairman-cum-managing Director, Vidyut Bhawan & Others,   23/11/2017.  

  Gunwantlal Godawat Versus Union of India & Another,   22/11/2017.  

  Rajendra Kumar Sharma Versus Principal Secretary, Public Works Department Rajasthan & Others,   22/11/2017.  

  Naveen Sharma & Others Versus The State of Rajasthan Through Its Home Secretary & Others,   21/11/2017.  

  The Registrar, Supreme Court of India Versus R.S. Misra,   21/11/2017.  

  Bhoopendra Singh Chauhan & Others Versus The State of Rajasthan Through Its Home Secretary & Others,   21/11/2017.  

  S. Meenakshi Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Chennai & Others,   20/11/2017.  

  R. Selvaraj Versus The Director of Survey & Land Records, Chepauk, Chennai & Another,   20/11/2017.  

  Karun @ Rahman & Another Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh,   20/11/2017.  

  Madan Singh Versus State of Rajasthan,   18/11/2017.  

  Kundan Singh & Others Versus State of Rajasthan through the Home Secretary, Secretariat & Others,   18/11/2017.  

  Sahadev & Others Versus of Rajasthan through the Home Secretary, Secretariat & Others,   18/11/2017.  

  Mahipal Dholiya & Others Versus State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Home Department & Others,   18/11/2017.  

  Ganga Singh & Others Versus State,   18/11/2017.  

  Avinash Trimbakrao Dhondage & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra & Another,   17/11/2017.  

  State of Gujarat Versus Vinod Parshottam @ Nathalal & Others,   17/11/2017.  

  M.C. Mehta Versus Union of India & Others,   17/11/2017.  

  Fekan Yadav Versus Mahendra Kumar @ Vishi & Another,   17/11/2017.  

  A. Kalaiselvi Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise (XVI) Department & Another,   16/11/2017.  

  Manik & Another Versus State of Maharashtra,   16/11/2017.  

  State of Maharashtra & Another Versus Vijay Ghogre & Others,   15/11/2017.  

  Sivanandan C.T. & Others Versus High Court of Kerala & Others,   14/11/2017.  

  Om Prakash Dhabai & Another Versus State of Rajasthan & Others,   14/11/2017.  

  State of Tripura & Others Versus Jayanta Chakraborty & Others,   14/11/2017.  

  Anil Kumar Yadav & Others Versus State (NCT) of Delhi & Another,   14/11/2017.  

  Lubna Pervez & Another Versus M/s. Vardhman Estates & Developers Pvt. Ltd.,   13/11/2017.  

  Prasadi Devi Versus Nagar Palika Sawai Madhopur, (Now Nagar Parishad),   13/11/2017.  

  Campaign for Judicial Accountability & Reforms Versus Union of India & Another,   10/11/2017.  

  Khekh Ram Versus State of H.P.,   10/11/2017.  

  M/s. SRD Nutrients Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Guwahati,   10/11/2017.  

  National Institute of Medical Science University Rajasthan & Another Versus State of Rajasthan & Others,   09/11/2017.  

  Inder Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. & Another Versus Kehar Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. & Others,   09/11/2017.  

  Jai Narain & Others Versus State of Rajasthan & Others,   09/11/2017.  

  Pradip Kumar Panda Versus Indian Rare Earths Limited & Others,   09/11/2017.  

#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw

  "2016 (1) CRLR 72"  ==   " 2015 (32) RCR(Cri) 858"  ==   ""  

    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.2. Learned counsel submits that so far as petitioner is concerned allegation does not exist for commission of rape. The allegation aforesaid exist against Rahul. It is further stated that there is contradiction in the story given in the FIR and statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The prosecutrix said to have remained with Rahul for one month. She took her jewellery while leaving Rahul. She came to Laxmangarh thereafter by travelling to various places as stated under Section 164 Cr.P.C. thus petitioner may be granted bail. It is moreso when nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner as jewellery was taken back by the prosecutrix herself.3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.4. After considering rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case which may otherwise affect outcome of the trial looking to the facts of this case I am of the view that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Raj Kumar S/o Ramveer Singh in FIR No.253/2013 registered with Police Station Laxmangarh District Alwar be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of L30 000/- together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before the court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.Bail application allowed.