Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RUPESH versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


RUPESH v STATE - CRLMB Case No. 7601 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 5265 (31 October 2007)

SB Cr.M.Bail Appl.No.7601/07.

S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPL.NO.7601/2007.

Rupesh Vs. State

Date of order : 31/10/2007.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ

Shri D.K. Bhardwaj for the petitioner.

Shri Harshvardhan Nandvana P.P. for the State.

******

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the case registered against the petitioner is for offence under Section 16/54 of the

Raj.Excise Act for having possessed five bottles of country made liquor and that petitioner was arrested on 21/9/2007 and ever since then he is in jail.

Investigation is almost complete and petitioner is no longer required for any purpose.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and argued that in view of seriousness of allegations, petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case but taking into consideration the aforesaid arguments, I deem it appropriate to

SB Cr.M.Bail Appl.No.7601/07. enlarge the petitioner on bail during trial.

In the result, this bail application u/S.439 is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Rupesh

S/o Chhote Lal shall be released on bail in F.I.R.

No.32/2007 registered at Excise Police Station

Circle (West) Alwar for offence under Section 16/54 of the Raj.Excise Act subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that court on all dates of hearing until conclusion of the trial.

In case, petitioner is again found indulging in similar offence in future, the liberty of bail granted to him, shall be liable to be cancelled at the instance of the prosecution on this ground alone.

(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.