Back
2023 Supreme(Raj) 892
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.
Narain Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 2221 of 2023
Decided On : 03-03-2023
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.353, S.307, S.324, S.332, S.333, S.34
Headnote
Bail - Enlargement on Bail - Similarity of Case with Co-accused - Grant of Bail
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. after being in custody for the offence under Sections 324, 332, 333, 353, 307/34 of IPC. The co-accused had been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of the Court, and the petitioner sought similar relief.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the case of the present petitioner was not distinguishable from the case of the co-accused who had been enlarged on bail. Considering the facts and circumstances, the Court granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Issues: Enlargement on bail for the petitioner, similarity of the case with the co-accused, and the opposition by the Public Prosecutor.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was influenced by the similarity of the petitioner's case with the co-accused who had been granted bail, and the inability of the Public Prosecutor to distinguish the two cases.
Final Decision: The second bail application filed by the petitioner was allowed, and the petitioner was directed to be released on bail upon fulfilling certain conditions.
Ghamandaram Choudhary, Advocate, Laxman Solanki, Advocate
JUDGMENT
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.121/2019, Sarwana Police Station, District Jalore, for the offence under Sections 324, 332, 333, 353, 307/34 of IPC.
2. Heard. Perused the material available on record.
3. After the rejection of the first bail application of the petitioner on 21.07.2020, the co-accused Suresh Kumar has been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.01.2023. He submits that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from the case of the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. He, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application but he is unable to distinguish the case of the present petitioner vis-a-vis the case of the co-accused person who has been enlarged on bail.
5. 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 a Coordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is also entitled for the grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
6. Accordingly, the present second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner-Narain Ram S/o Sh. Likhma Ram shall be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. No.121/2019, Sarwana Police Station, District Jalore provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees: Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
7. However, it is made clear that after the enlargement on bail in this case, if the petitioner is found involved in any other criminal case, then no leniency will be extended to the petitioner in future. Record of this condition and the antecedents of the petitioner will be maintained by the concerned Police Station of the area where the petitioner reside.
8. A copy of this order be sent to the local police station where the petitioner resides.
9. It is also ordered that the petitioner will mark his attendance in the local police station of the area of his permanent residence in every three months.
