Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LALCHAND & ANR versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


LALCHAND & ANR v STATE - CRLMB Case No. 5766 of 2006 [2007] RD-RJ 81 (4 January 2007)

S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.5766/2006

Date : 04.01.2007

HON'BLE MR. SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK, J.

Mr. Hemant Jain for the applicants.

Mr. Vishnu Kachhawaha, Public Prosecutor for State.

I have heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order.

The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the matter relates to the year 1996 and First

Information Report was lodged in the year 1998 and other co- accused has been granted bail by the learned trial court. He submits that the applicants' case will be considered for granting anticipatory bail .

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

I have considered the submissions made before me.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties while taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I think it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicants (1) Lal Chand s/o Shri Ram Lal Ji and (2)

Hem Raj s/o Manohar Lal by I.O./S.H.O. in FIR No.249/1998

P.S. Raisinghnagar, they shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.30,000/- alongwith two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of Investigating

Officer on the following conditions:-

(i)That they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii)That they shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and;

(iii)That they shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

(SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK), J. vij


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.