Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ABDUL JAFFAR versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ABDUL JAFFAR v STATE - CRLMB Case No. 516 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 498 (24 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJAASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR.

ORDER

Abdul Jaffar

Versus tate

S.B. CR.MISC.5th BAIL APPLICATION NO.516/2007 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. ate of order :- 24/1/2007.

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARBANS LAL

Mr. Harendra Singh for the petitioner.

Mr. S.N. Gupta P.P. for the State.

****

BY THE COURT:-

This fifth bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. as been filed on behalf of petitioner Abdul Jaffar who is acing trial alongwith others before the court of learned dditional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Jaipur ity, Jaipur on the charge for offences under Sections 307/34 nd 302 I.P.C. and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act in Sessions Case o.94/2005.

I have heard both sides and have perused the relevant ocuments including the statements of the witnesses so far xamined during the trial.

As per the report obtained from the concerned court, 9 itnesses remained to be examined for recording of whose tatements, 1/12/2006 was fixed in the trial court.

There is no material or substantial change after the rejection of his fourth bail application which was rejected vide order dated 15/11/2006.

Having carefully considered the submissions made at the bar and keeping in view the evidence that has come on record during the trial and the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble

Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Ritesh {(2001) 4 SCC 224} as also the gravity of the charges against the petitioner, no case for grant of bail to him is made out because the trial is already in progress and it appears to be at its fag end.

Hence, this fifth bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C. in F.I.R. No.130/2005 P.S. Subhash Chowk, Jaipur is hereby rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to make all sincere endeavours to conclude it at the earliest possible. In case, the trial is not concluded within a period of four months from the date of filing of certified copy of this order, the petitioner shall be free to file fresh bail application either before the trial court or before this Court.

(HARBANS LAL), 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.