Dilip Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan

Dilip Kumar vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Jul 08, 2011

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/920478

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/920478
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Mohammad Rafiq, J.
Decided On: Jul 08, 2011
Case Number: Case No. CRLMB 6601 of 2011
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code Of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) - Section 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 302

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dilip Kumar

Advocate Shri, Sunil Kumar Singodiya, Adv.

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Advocate Shri. Amit Punia, Adv

Legal References

Acts: Code Of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) - Section 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 302

Excerpt

.....lalita devi and ram prasad bhatt are recorded. the prosecution was directed to record those statement on priority basis. the statements of those witnesses have been recorded and all the witnesses have turned hostile. in the circumstances the prosecution is not likely to succeed. there is no previous case ever registered against the petitioner. 3. learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application, however, he could not dispute the fact that all the witnesses have turned hostile. 4. after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, i deem it just and proper to allow this bail application. it is therefore ordered that accused-petitioner, namely, dilip kumar son of shri chandanmal, resident of 3/4, sunder nagar, beawar, district ajmer be released on bail under section 439 cr.p.c., in fir no.587/2010, police station beawar city, district ajmer, for offence under section 302 ipc, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of rs.50,000/- with two sureties of rs.25000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 5. however, in case petitioner is again found indulging in similar or any other offence at any point of time in future and that misstatement has been made about his whereabouts or non-registration of any other criminal case, the bail granted to him by this court in present case would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of prosecution on this ground alone and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in bail bonds produced by petitioner, and sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by tehsildar of area concerned. 6. the second bail application stands disposed of.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused material made available to me during course of arguments.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by order of this court dated 01.04.2011 with liberty to the petitioner to again apply for bail before the trial court after statements of Sonu, Bansi Lal, Ram Prasad Bhati, Lalita Devi and Ram Prasad Bhatt are recorded. The prosecution was directed to record those statement on priority basis. The statements of those witnesses have been recorded and all the witnesses have turned hostile. In the circumstances the prosecution is not likely to succeed. There is no previous case ever registered against the petitioner.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, however, he could not dispute the fact that all the witnesses have turned hostile.

4. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, I deem it just and proper to allow this bail application. It is therefore ordered that accused-petitioner, namely, Dilip Kumar Son of Shri Chandanmal, Resident of 3/4, Sunder Nagar, Beawar, District Ajmer be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.587/2010, Police Station Beawar City, District Ajmer, for offence under Section 302 IPC, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

5. However, in case petitioner is again found indulging in similar or any other offence at any point of time in future and that misstatement has been made about his whereabouts or non-registration of any other criminal case, the bail granted to him by this court in present case would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of prosecution on this ground alone and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in bail bonds produced by petitioner, and sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by Tehsildar of area concerned.

6. The second bail application stands disposed of.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2011 Same Parties Dilip Kumar vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Mohammad Rafiq, J. Acts & Sections Code Of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) - Section 439; Indian Penal...