Bimal Kumar JaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan

Bimal Kumar Jain vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Application allowed Court Rajasthan Decided May 20, 1988

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/763805

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/763805
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Vinod Shanker Dave, J.
Decided On: May 20, 1988
Case Number: S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 1086 of 1988
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Application allowed

Case Summary

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

Penal Code - Sections 486 and 114 and Trade Marks Act--Section 63, 78 and79 and Criminal Procedure Code--Section 438--Anticipatory bail--Case registered at Surat--No blanket order under Section 438 can be passed--Held, it is proper to give protection to petitioner for 5 weeks till he presents himself before Investig...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Application allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bimal Kumar Jain

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 1988WLN(UC)250

Excerpt

penal code - sections 486 and 114 and trade marks act--section 63, 78 and79 and criminal procedure code--section 438--anticipatory bail--case registered at surat--no blanket order under section 438 can be passed--held, it is proper to give protection to petitioner for 5 weeks till he presents himself before investigating officer.;intrim bail granted - - 2,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the sho/ao/io on the following conditions:vinod shanker dave, j.1. this an application for anticipatory bail in a case registered at police station salavatpura district surat (gujarat) under section 486 and 114 ipc and sections 63, 78 and 79 of the trade marks act in f.i.r. no. 94/88 dated 15-3-1988. i am afraid a blanket order under section 438 cr.pc cannot be passed by this court. how ever, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, i deem it proper to give protection to the petitioner for the time being till he presents himself before the investigating officer. i accordingly issue directions that the petitioner shall on or before 27th june, 1988 surrender before the sho, police station salavatpur district surat and make available himself for interrogation. it will be open to the sho, police station salavatpur to produce the petitioner before the concerned magistrate forwith. meanwhile it is directed that if on or before 27-6-1988 the petitioner is arrested in fir no. 94/88 dated 15-3-1988 of police station, salavatpur district surat, then be shall be released on bail provided he executes a. bond in the sum of rs. 2,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the sho/ao/io on the following conditions:[a] that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;[b] that the petitioner shall not directly, or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court, or any police officer; and[c]that the petitioner shall not leave india without the previous permission of the court.2. learned counsel submits that it may be observed in the order that he will free to move a similar application in the high court of gujarat. such observation, i am afraid cannot be made since it is his will he may seek any remedy to which he is entitled under law.

Full Judgment

Vinod Shanker Dave, J.

1. This an application for anticipatory bail in a case registered at Police Station Salavatpura district Surat (Gujarat) under Section 486 and 114 IPC and Sections 63, 78 and 79 of the Trade Marks Act in F.I.R. No. 94/88 dated 15-3-1988. I am afraid a blanket order under Section 438 Cr.PC cannot be passed by this court. How ever, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, I deem it proper to give protection to the petitioner for the time being till he presents himself before the Investigating Officer. I accordingly issue directions that the petitioner shall on or before 27th June, 1988 surrender before the SHO, Police Station Salavatpur district Surat and make available himself for interrogation. It will be open to the SHO, Police Station Salavatpur to produce the petitioner before the concerned Magistrate forwith. Meanwhile it is directed that if on or before 27-6-1988 the petitioner is arrested in FIR No. 94/88 dated 15-3-1988 of Police Station, Salavatpur district Surat, then be shall be released on bail provided he executes a. bond in the sum of Rs. 2,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the SHO/AO/IO on the following conditions:

[a] that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

[b] that the petitioner shall not directly, or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court, or any Police Officer; and

[c]that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

2. Learned Counsel submits that it may be observed in the order that he will free to move a similar application in the High Court of Gujarat. Such observation, I am afraid cannot be made since it is his will he may seek any remedy to which he is entitled under law.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 1988 Same Parties Bimal Kumar Jain vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Vinod Shanker Dave, J.

Criminal