SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(RAJ) 28945

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MUNNURI LAXMAN, J
PRADEEP KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 12245 / 2024



Advocates:
Mr. R.S. Choudhary, Mr. Bhoop Singh Choudhary, Mr. Manoj Chotia, Mr. Sharwan Singh Rathore, Mr. Jogendar Singh, Mr. Kishan Singh

Bail may be granted if there is insufficient evidence linking the accused to the crime and their continued detention is unjustified.

Headnote:(A) B.N.S. (Old Section 439 Cr.P.C.) - Section 483 - Bail applications - Applicants arrested for offences under Sections 333, 140(3), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2) - Allegations of serious assault made by complainant - Applicants denied involvement in FIR, lack of identification - Court grants bail considering the absence of direct evidence against applicants and their prolonged custody. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 7, 8)

(B) Judicial Discretion - The court must consider the totality of circumstances before granting bail, including the nature of allegations and the evidence on record. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The applicants were arrested in connection with an FIR alleging they assaulted the complainant, but their names were not included in the FIR. The complainant and applicants are from the same village.

Findings of Court:
The court found insufficient evidence linking the applicants to the injuries sustained by the complainant, leading to the decision to grant bail.

Issues: The main issues were the lack of direct evidence against the applicants and the implications of their prolonged judicial custody.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that bail can be granted when there is no direct evidence against the accused and when their continued custody is unjustified.

Result: Bail applications allowed.

Order

1. The present order disposes of both the applications (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12245/2024 and 12729/2024). Applicants have preferred these bail applications under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. (Old Section 439 Cr.P.C.). The applicants have been arrested in connection with FIR No.125/2024 of Police Station Fefana, District – Hanumangarh for the offences punishable under Sections 333, 140(3), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2) of the B.N.S.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.08.2024 the complainant Sushil Kumar gave a Parcha Bayan to the police alleging therein that on 09.08.2024 at about 9:00 am., present applicants along with other accused-persons came in Bolero to his house and took him in the Bolero and reached near School at Harizan Basti and there they have allegedly beaten the complainant with fists, leaving him in unconscious condition and fled away from the spot. On the said Parcha Bayan the FIR was registered against the accused persons.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicants and the victims belongs to the same village and they are relative also. Learned counsel further submits that neither their names were found in the FIR nor were there Test Identification Parade was conducted.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the accused-applicants are in judicial custody since long and the trial of the case will take long time. Therefore, it is prayed that the accused-applicants may be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application, while contending that the investigation is still pending. The accused persons have brutally beaten the injured and they should not be enlarged on bail.

6. As seen from the injury report of the injured, there are 5 injuries all are given from the blunt object. One injury on the left hand thumb is grievous in nature. There is no specific overt act attributed to the accused-applicants regarding nature of injury caused by them. In fact the names of the accused-applicants were not reflected in the FIR and both the parties belong to the same village. If the victim knew them, he must supply their names to the police while registering his complaint.

7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused-

applicants under Section 483 of BNSS (Old Section 439 Cr.P.C.)

8. Accordingly, both these bail applications filed under Section 483 of BNSS (Old Section 439 Cr.P.C.) are allowed and it is directed that applicants (1) Pradeep Kumar S/o Nand Lal Singh, (2) Sumit S/o Gajendra Singh and (3) Ramesh S/o Surajbhan Singh in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12245/2024 and the applicant Ajay Singh S/o Dinesh in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12729/2024 shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.125/2024 of Police Station Fefana, District – Hanumangarh, provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for their appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top