SONU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present bail application has been filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.390/2012, Police Station Ratangarh, District Churu, for the offences under Ss. 302,364 and 120-B of IPC. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the co-accused Anil @ Pandiya, Rajendra @ Kaniya & Mukesh Yadav have already been granted bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court. He further submits that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from the case of the co-accused Mukesh Yadav who has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dtd. 16/1/2024.

(2.) The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application but he is unable to distinguish the case of the present petitioner vis-a-vis the case of the co-accused Mukesh Yadav persons who has been enlarged on bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced and considering the fact that the case of the present petitioner is identical to co-accused aforesaid who has been enlarged on bail by this Court, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is also entitled for the grant of bail under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Consequently, the bail application filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Sonu S/o Chiman arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.390/2012, Police Station Ratangarh, District Churu, shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000.00(Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000.00 (Rupees: Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so