Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 11377
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI, VJ
Bhajan Lal S/o Bhagirth Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6039/2025 | S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6037/2025 | S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6041/2025 | S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7059/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. Dinesh Vishnoi, Mr. Anand Purohit, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Mayank Roy
For the Respondents:Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG, Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, Public Prosecutor, Mr. Rajiv Bishnoi for Mr. Vineet Jain, Sr. Advocate for complainant
Petitioners, not named in the FIR and on similar grounds as co-accused granted bail, are entitled to bail under specified conditions.
Headnote:(A) Penal Code, 1860 - Various Sections including 341, 302/34, 201 & 120B IPC - Arms Act, 1959 - Bail applications filed by petitioners arrested in connection with serious offences including murder - Petitioners not named in FIR, have long been in custody, and co-accused have been granted bail - Court inclined to grant bail considering similar footing. (Paras 8, 9)
(B) Bail - Criteria for granting - The court should consider whether the applicants are named in FIR and the nature of accusations against them - If co-accused have been granted bail, similar treatment should be given unless distinct factual differentiations are present. (Paras 10, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners were arrested in relation to the murder of Laxman, a liquor contractor, which involved alleged gunfire by identified individuals. The petitioners argue they were falsely implicated and are not named in the FIR.
Findings of Court:
Considering the petitioners are not named in the FIR and similar co-accused have been bailed out, the court grants bail under specified conditions.
Issues: The court considered the absence of direct allegations in the FIR against the petitioners and the bail granted to co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated the principle that bail may be granted if there are no substantive allegations against the applicants and the circumstances justify their release. Bail to be granted on conditions assuring appearance before the trial court.
Result: Bail applications allowed with conditions.
Order
16/06/2025 These applications for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.424/2023, registered at Police Station Sanchore, District Jalore for the offences under Sections 341 , 302/34, 212, 201 & 120B IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.
As per the case of the prosecution, on 08.08.2023 the complainant Tejaram has a given a written report to the effect that, his brother Laxman is a liquor contractor. On 07.08.2023 at about 5:30 pm, his brother Laxman along with Ramesh Rebari was going to his liquor godown situated at Makhupura in his Scorpio car. The said Scorpio was being driven by Ramesh Rebari. When they reached near hotel Galaxy Paradise, National Highway Tharad Road, goons of Prakash Godara came chasing them in a Fortuner Car and they restrained their way with the said Scorpio and with an intention to kill his brother Laxman, three accused persons fired many gun shot with the revolver. Vasram, Ragaram, Vikram, Madharam, Vachan Singh were also coming behind them in another vehicle who came to rescue his brother. After seeing them, the accused persons ran away from the spot in their Scorpio. Laxman succumbed to the gun shot injuries. The allegation of said incident was levelled against the accused Prakash Godara who caused the murder of his brother Laxman in the aforesaid firing. Earlier also before this incident, accused Mukesh, Tag Singh, Sunil @ Gopiya, Vikky, Kamlesh, Bhajanlal along with other accused persons have made firing on his brother Laxman with an intention to kill his brother.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that accused-
petitioners have no concern with the present incident. They have been falsely implicated in the present case. The whole allegations are levelled against co-accused Prakash Godara and his goons.
They have not been in the FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that co-accused Usman @ Bablu, Mangi Lal @ Tatiya, Suresh Kumar, Tag Singh, Kamlesh Kumar, Vikas @ Vikki, Omprakash @ Pappu Ram, Lalit, Bhupendra, Hanuman Ram, Ghewarchand, Vishnu @ Vishnu Khudala and Mahesh by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 24.04.2024, 29.05.2024, 02.07.2024, 24.04.2024, 10.05.2024, 27.08.2024, 27.08.2024, 22.02.2024, 22.02.2024, 29.05.2024, 02.07.2024, 17.09.2024 and 01.03.2024, passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 3233/2024, 5945/2024, 7995/2024, 2903/2024, 5437/2024, 9260/2024, 8497/2024, 12087/2023, 12718/2023, 5944/2024, 7289/2024, 5946/2024 & 11596/2023 respectively. The case of the present petitioners is not different than that of the co-accused aforesaid who have granted bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that there are no material available on record to connect the present petitioners with the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since long and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that principal accused Prakash Godara along with other co-accused persons assaulted on Laxman (brother of the complainant) with an intention to kill him. Three accused persons fired many gun shot with the revolver. Vasram, Ragaram, Vikram, Madharam, Vachan Singh were also coming behind them in another vehicle who came to rescue his brother. After seeing them, the accused persons ran away from the spot in their Scorpio. Laxman succumbed to the gun shot injuries. However, learned Public Prosecutor does not dispute the fact that the case of the present petitioners is on similar footing as the case of the co-accused pers
