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.

Munnawar Silawat Vs. State

Munnawar Silawat vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Nov 19, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/973902

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 Jodhpur 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

Munnawar Silawat

Respondent

State

Excerpt

1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur order munnawar silawat vs. the state of raj. s.b. criminal revision petition no. 834/2012 under section 53 read with section 12/54 juvenile justice(care and protection of children) act rad with section 397/401,cr.p.c. against the orders dated 19.9.2012 passed by learned sessions judge, bhilwara in criminal appeal no. 158/2012. date of order :19. 11.2012 present hon'ble mrs. nisha gupta, j.mr. n.k. rastogi, for the petitioner. mr. o.p. singaria , public prosecutor for the state. by the court: this revision petition has been filed against the order dated 19.9.2012 passed by learned sessions judge, bhilwara whereby the bail application of juvenile has been rejected affirming the order dated 15.9.2012 passed by the chief judicial magistrate, bhilwara in fir no. 407/2012.. heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor for the state. 2 the contention of the present petitioner is that juvenile is in custody since long and looking to the provisions of section 12 of the juvenile justice(care and protection of children) act, 2000, he should be released on bail. per contra, the contention of the learned public prosecutor is that this revision petition has been moved by the brother of the juvenile who is not the natural guardian of juvenile and further more, one other case is also pending against the juvenile, meaning thereby that family is not having adequate control over the activities of the juvenile, hence the juvenile should not be released. without going into the merit of the case and looking at the fact that brother is not natural guardian of the juvenile and other case is also pending against the present petitioner, no infirmity could be found in the orders of the courts below and this revision petition is liable to be dismissed. ( nisha gupta),j.mlt/162

Full Judgment

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Munnawar Silawat vs. The State of Raj. S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 834/2012 under Section 53 read with Section 12/54 Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act rad with Section 397/401,Cr.P.C. against the orders dated 19.9.2012 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara in Criminal Appeal No. 158/2012. Date of Order :

19. 11.2012 PRESENT HON'BLE MRS. NISHA GUPTA, J.

Mr. N.K. Rastogi, for the petitioner. Mr. O.P. Singaria , Public Prosecutor for the State. BY THE COURT: This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 19.9.2012 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara whereby the bail application of juvenile has been rejected affirming the order dated 15.9.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara in FIR No. 407/2012.. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 2 The contention of the present petitioner is that juvenile is in custody since long and looking to the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, he should be released on bail. Per contra, the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that this revision petition has been moved by the brother of the juvenile who is not the natural guardian of juvenile and further more, one other case is also pending against the juvenile, meaning thereby that family is not having adequate control over the activities of the juvenile, hence the juvenile should not be released. Without going into the merit of the case and looking at the fact that brother is not natural guardian of the juvenile and other case is also pending against the present petitioner, no infirmity could be found in the orders of the courts below and this revision petition is liable to be dismissed. ( NISHA GUPTA),J.

mlt/162

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial