IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN 1. S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.1592/2011 Manish Vs. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor 2. S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.1593/2011 Rakesh Vs. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor Date of Order ::: 10.03.2011 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Ashvin Garg, counsel for petitioners Shri Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor Shri Suresh Naraina, counsel for complainant #### By the Court:-
Since both bail applications arise out of same FIR No.574/2010, Police Station Ramgarh, District Alwar, same are being decided by this common order.
Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for complainant and perused material made available to me during course of arguments.
Contention of learned counsel for petitioners is that F.I.R. No.574/2010 was registered against petitioners for offence under Sections 323, 341, 452 and 307 IPC. Petitioner Manish was in love with Renu Saini, daughter of complainant, and complainant called him and then certain dispute took place between the two. In that scuffle, metacarpal bone of complainant got fractured. Petitioner Manish, for that reason was arrested on 14.02.2011. Dispute is because petitioner is in love with daughter of complainant, who fled away with him and therefore another FIR No.84/2011 for offence under Sections 365 and 366 of IPC was registered. Father of the girl filed an application before the court even for her custody. In the statement of girl Renu recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stated that she had left her house on her own will and she got married to Manish and that she wanted to reside with him. In this connection, learned counsel referred to affidavit of girl Renu and argued that dispute is because of inter-caste marriage of petitioner Manish and the girl.
So far petitioner Rakesh in Bail Application No.1593/2011 is concerned, he is cousin of petitioner Manish and he has been made accused on the allegation of Section 307 IPC.
Petitioners are behind the bars since their arrest. Trial of case may take a long.
Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant opposed the bail application and argued that in view of allegations against petitioners, they are not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
After considering all facts and circumstances of case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, I deem it just and proper to release accused-petitioner Manish Son of Kishore Lal, Resident of Nogawan, Police Station Ramgarh, District Alwar (Bail Application No.1592/2011) and accused-petitioner Rakesh Son of Kailash Chand, Resident of Ramgarh, Police Station Ramgarh, District Alwar (Bail Application No.1593/2011) on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.574/2010, Police Station Ramgarh, District Alwar for offence under Sections 323, 341, 452 and 307 IPC, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15000/- each, to satisfaction of trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
Both bail applications stand disposed of.
(Mohammad Rafiq) J.
//Jaiman//