✦ Rajasthan High Court · 08 Feb 2010

In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9709/2009 Umesh Vijay v. State of Rajasthan Date Of Order :: 8th February

M N BHANDARI

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

O R D E R In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9709/2009 Umesh Vijay Vs. State of Rajasthan Date Of Order :: 8th February, 2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.N. Bhandari Mr. N.K.Joshi, for the petitioner. Mr. Laxman Meena, Public Prosecutor. .......... Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. It is stated that so far petitioner is concerned, he was working for and on behalf of dealer, thus, is not involved in this case and only that he was brining back palm oil and ghee on the instructions of the dealer Raju, thus, petitioner is behind the bars for last few months and may be released on bail. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. After considering the rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect the outcome of the trial, looking to the facts of this case, I am of the view that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is accepted and I consider it just and proper to release the accused-petitioner namely, Umesh Vijay on bail under section 439 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.208/2009 registered at Police Station- Kotwali, Fatehpur for offence under sections 420, 272, 273 of IPC read with section 7/16 of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 provided he, furnishes a personal bond in the sum of CRLMB 9709/09 Umesh Vijay Vs. State (2) Rs.40,000/- together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (M.N. Bhandari),J. VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D32

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 272, 273, 420; Food Adulteration Act, 1954 — ss. 7, 16.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Rajasthan High Court, on 08 Feb 2010. The bench was M N BHANDARI.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Rajasthan High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments