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.

Mahaveer Vs. State of Rajasthan

Mahaveer vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Jul 19, 1995
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/764636

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
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3166 of 1995
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code - Section 439 Bail--Petitioner ready to appear before Court--Injury report and nature of offence considered-Held, direction issued that petitioner he released on bail of he appears before court on 28.7.1995.;But the concerned Magistrate disagreeing with the said report, took cognizance in the...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mahaveer

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1995(2)WLN312

Excerpt

criminal procedure code - section 439 bail--petitioner ready to appear before court--injury report and nature of offence considered-held, direction issued that petitioner he released on bail of he appears before court on 28.7.1995.;but the concerned magistrate disagreeing with the said report, took cognizance in the case and issued a non-bailable warrant to secure the attendance of the petitioner.;after taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances including the injury report and the nature of offence, i think it proper to give following direction in the case to avoid further delay in the trial.' 1. the petitioner shall appear on or before 28th july 1995 before the concerned court and if he does so, he shall be released on bail.;order accordingly - - 5,000/- and a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the said court with the stipulation to appear before the concerned courts on all subsequent dates of hearing during enquiry or trial as the case may be.n.l. tibrewal, j.1. heard.2. it is contended by the learned counsel that the police investigated the matter and, thereafter, submitted a final report, but the concerned magistrate disagreeing with the said report, took cognizance in the case and issued a non-bailable warrant to secure the attendance of the petitioner. learned counsel also contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the said court to face trial in the case. it was also contended that the order taking cognizance was challenged before this court, but the revision was dismissed with the observation that the petitioner shall be free to move objections before the concerned court at the stage of framing charge.3. after taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances including the injury report and the nature of offence, i think it proper to give following direction in the case to avoid further delay in the trial.1. that the petitioner shall appear on or before 28th july 1995 before the concerned court and if he does so, he shall be released on ball on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of rs. 5,000/- and a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the said court with the stipulation to appear before the concerned courts on all subsequent dates of hearing during enquiry or trial as the case may be.2. till 28th july the petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance to the order of the learned magistrate, whereby non-bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner. in case the petitioner fails to comply with the aforesaid order upto the specified date, this application shall stand dismissed and the concerned court shall be free to issue fresh non-bailable warrants to secure attendance of the petitioner.4. the ball application stands disposed of as indicated above.

Full Judgment

N.L. Tibrewal, J.

1. Heard.

2. It is contended by the learned Counsel that the police investigated the matter and, thereafter, submitted a final report, but the concerned Magistrate disagreeing with the said report, took cognizance in the case and issued a non-bailable warrant to secure the attendance of the petitioner. Learned Counsel also contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the said court to face trial in the case. It was also contended that the order taking cognizance was challenged before this Court, but the revision was dismissed with the observation that the petitioner shall be free to move objections before the concerned court at the stage of framing charge.

3. After taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances including the injury report and the nature of offence, I think it proper to give following direction in the case to avoid further delay in the trial.

1. That the petitioner shall appear on or before 28th July 1995 before the concerned court and If he does so, he shall be released on ball on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- and a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the said court with the stipulation to appear before the concerned courts on all subsequent dates of hearing during enquiry or trial as the case may be.

2. Till 28th July the petitioner shall not be arrested In pursuance to the order of the learned Magistrate, whereby non-bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner. In case the petitioner fails to comply with the aforesaid order upto the specified date, this application shall stand dismissed and the concerned court shall be free to issue fresh non-bailable warrants to secure attendance of the petitioner.

4. The ball application stands disposed of as indicated above.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial