2013 Supreme(Raj) 851
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Prashant Kumar Agarwal, J.
Roop Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1076 of 2013.
Decided On : 20-02-2013
Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Rajesh Goswami, Advocate.
For the State: Laxman Meena, PP.
For the Complainant:Santosh Choudhary, Advocate.
The grant of bail to an accused is not dependent upon the nature or mode of the process issued for his appearance before the Court but it would depend on the provisions of the bail bonds as provided in Chapter XXXIII of Cr.PC. and the well settled principles of law for grant of bail.
Headnote:
Bail - Grant of Bail under Section 439 Cr.PC. - Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 3/25 of Indian Arms Act - [Sections 147, 148, 307, 149 IPC, Section 3/25 Indian Arms Act] - The court discussed the provisions of bail bonds as provided in Chapter XXXIII of Cr.PC. and the well settled legal position prevalent in this regard. The release of an accused on bail is in the discretion of the Court which is to be exercised judicially taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case including the gravity of the offence and the Court is not bound to release him on bail merely because bailable warrant or summons was issued by the Court to secure his attendance and in case of bailable warrant security was also taken from him to attend the court on a specified date and time. The Court granting bail has to consider among other circumstances the factors such as the nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence; reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to complainant; and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-applicant moved an application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.PC. in respect of FIR No. 243/2011 registered for offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 3/25 of Indian Arms Act. The application was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The complainant alleged that the applicant and others attacked him and his daughter-in-law with firearms, resulting in injuries. Cognizance was taken against the applicant and others under Section 319 Cr.PC. and bailable warrants were issued.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the grant of bail to an accused is not dependent upon the nature or mode of the process issued for his appearance before the Court but it would depend on the provisions of the bail bonds as provided in Chapter XXXIII of Cr.PC. and the well settled principles of law for grant of bail. The court also considered the gravity of the offence, the nature of supporting evidence, and the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice or tampering with the prosecution witnesses.
Issues: The issues revolved around the entitlement of the accused to be released on bail based on the stage at which cognizance was taken against him and the provisions of law and the well settled legal position prevalent in this regard.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the grant of bail to an accused is not dependent upon the nature or mode of the process issued for his appearance before the Court but it would depend on the provisions of the bail bonds as provided in Chapter XXXIII of Cr.PC. and the well settled principles of law for grant of bail.
Final Decision: The bail application was dismissed, and the court found it not a fit case in which benefit of bail is to be granted to the applicant.
JUDGMENT
1. - The accused-applicant has moved this application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.PC. in respect of FIR No. 243/2011 registered at Police Station Nadbai, District Bharatpur for offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 3/25 of Indian Arms Act. The application filed by the applicant for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.PC. has been dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 4 Bharatpur vide order dated 19.01.2013.
2. Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this application are that complainant-Shri Banay Singh in his "Parcha- Bayan" alleged that on 13.5.2011 at about 6.00 p.m. in the evening he and his daughter-in-law Smt. Pista were attacked by as many as eight persons including the present applicant and fire-arms were also used by the applicant, Shri Siya Ram and Bishan Singh and as a result thereof both of them received fire arm injuries also on various parts of their body. It was also alleged that when some persons as named in the "Parcha-Bayan" intervened, fire arm shots were aimed towards them also. On the basis of Parcha-Bayan, FIR towards them also. On the basis of Parcha-Bayan, FIR No. 243/2011 for offences under Sections 143 and 307 IPC was registered and after investigation charge-sheet was filed against five persons for various offences including offence under Section 307 IPC but the present applicant and the aforesaid- Siya Ram and Bishan Singh were not charge-sheeted by the investigating agency. Charges for various offences including offence under Section 307 IPC were framed against five persons against whom charge-sheet was filed and presently they are facing trial. The third, application filed by the accused- Narendra @ Guddu, who is facing trial, was allowed by the Coordinate Bench vide order dated 06.07.2012 after taking into consideration the statements of injured-witnesses- Shri Banay Singh and Smt. Pista. This fact was also taken into consideration by the Co-ordinate Bench that the main accusation levelled by the aforesaid prosecution witnesses is against Shri Siya Ram, Bishan Singh and Roop Singh i.e. the present applicant. Similarly, the third application for grant of bail filed by the co-accused-Shri Dungar Singh and Lokesh @ Lala was also allowed by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 30.05.2012 on similar grounds.
3. It appears that during trial, complainant-Shri Banay Singh filed an application under Section 319 Cr.RC. on 10.05.2012 with the averment that from the evidence available on record it is clear that present applicant-Roop Singh, Bishan Singh and Siya Ram were also involved in the incident and they used fire arms. It was prayed by the complainant that cognizance for offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act may be taken against the aforesaid persons also. The learned trial Court after considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties, vide its order dated 01.12.2012 took cognizance against all three aforesaid persons for offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Indian Arms Act and to procure their appearance before the Court bailable warrants were issued. In compliance of the bailable warrant, applicant appeared before the trial Court and moved application to release him on bail under Section 439 Cr.PC. but the same was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 19.01.2013. In these circumstances, the accused-applicant has come to this Court for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.PC.
4. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case the applicant was not arrayed as an accused in the charge-sheet and cognizance has been taken against him by the Court below under Section 319 Cr.PC. on an application filed by the complainant and he has been summoned by way of bailable warrant and, therefore, he was entitled to be released on bail without considering the merit and de-merit of the case i.e. without looking into t
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
