Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Jai Raikwar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Jai Raikwar vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Mar 22, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1045440

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jai Raikwar

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

m.cr.c.no.3075/2013 22.3.2013 shri ramkirpal mishra, advocate for the applicant. shri r.k.kesarwani, pl for the state. this is the firs.bail application filed by the applicant under section 439 of the cr.p.c.for grant of bail. the applicant is in custody since 29.9.2012 in connection with crime no.86/2008 registered at p.s.civil line, district chhatarpur for the offence punishable under sections 457, 380 of the ipc. learned counsel for the applicant submits that the previously the applicant was released on bail, however, the applicant remained absent before the trial court, therefore, the trial court issued warrant of arrest against him and in compliance of the warrant of arrest, he has been sent to the jail. the applicant will regularly appear before the trial court and will also co-operate in trial. the applicant is in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail. learned counsel for state has opposed the application. on due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of rs.25,000/- (rs.twenty five thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the committal court/trial court for securing his presence before the said court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial. it is made clear that in case the applicant further remains absent during trial, he will not be entitled to be released on bail till the disposal of the criminal case. certified copy as per rules. (g.s.solanki) judge pb

Full Judgment

M.Cr.C.No.3075/2013 22.3.2013 Shri Ramkirpal Mishra, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State.

This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail.

The applicant is in custody since 29.9.2012 in connection with Crime No.86/2008 registered at P.S.Civil Line, District Chhatarpur for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380 of the IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the previously the applicant was released on bail, however, the applicant remained absent before the trial Court, therefore, the trial Court issued warrant of arrest against him and in compliance of the warrant of arrest, he has been sent to the jail.

The applicant will regularly appear before the trial Court and will also co-operate in trial.

The applicant is in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail.

Learned counsel for State has opposed the application.

On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the committal Court/trial Court for securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial.

It is made clear that in case the applicant further remains absent during trial, he will not be entitled to be released on bail till the disposal of the criminal case.

Certified copy as per rules.

(G.S.Solanki) Judge PB

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial