Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 382 (RAJ)

Ram v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-02-05

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2022
JUDGMENT Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - Lawyers are not physically appearing in the Court in view of the unprecedented situation being faced by the country due to pandemic of novel corona virus (COVID-19). 2. The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners who are in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.223/2021, Police Station Bilara, District Jodhpur, for the offence under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material available on record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the charge sheet in the case has been filed. He further submits that the offences are triable by the Magistrate. The conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, it is prayed that the petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced as also the present situation of the country due to pandemic of corona virus (COVID-19), in particular the jails, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners are also entitled for the grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 6. accordingly, the present bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is directed that the petitioners (1) Shera Ram S/o Hapu Ram (2) Sawai Ram S/o Hapu Ram (3) Mahesh S/o Sh. Pemaram shall be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. No.223/2021, Police Station Bilara, District Jodhpur provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees: Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for their appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. 7. However, it is made clear that after the enlargement of the petitioners on bail in this case, if the petitioners are found involved in any other criminal case, then no leniency will be extended to them in future. Record of this condition and the antecedents of the petitioners will be maintained by the concerned Police Station where the petitioners reside. However, it is made clear that after the enlargement of the petitioners on bail in this case, if the petitioners are found involved in any other criminal case, then no leniency will be extended to them in future. Record of this condition and the antecedents of the petitioners will be maintained by the concerned Police Station where the petitioners reside. a copy of this order be sent to the local Police Station where the petitioners reside. 8. It is also ordered that the petitioners will mark their attendance in the local Police Station of the area of their permanent residence in every three months.