HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc. IInd Bail Application No. 14659/2022

Surendra Singh @ Bablu Son Of Shri Bhawani Singh, Aged About

23 Years, Resident Of J-569, Ajad Nagar, Rankdi, Police Station

Sodala, Jaipur (Raj.) At Present At Central Jail Jaipur.

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Amit Punia

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Rajendra Yadav, AAG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

16/01/2023

1.

The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioner-

Surendra Singh @ Bablu Son Of Shri Bhawani Singh under Section

439 Cr.P.C against the order impugned passed by learned court

below in connection with FIR No. 47/2021 registered at Police

Station Sodala, Jaipur for the offence(s) under Sections 302, 460

& 380 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that eye witness

account of the incident is not available on record and thus the

entire case of the prosecution hinges upon circumstantial evidence

but neither the circumstances put forth are definite in tendency

nor conclusive in nature. The FIR came to be lodged against

unknown person on the basis of suspicion, 60-70 persons were

interrogated, the petitioner was arrested. It is alleged that one

cash book, one voucher book, one note book & one tape-recorder

(2 of 3)

(cRLMB-14659/2022)

of Panasonic company were recovered from the petitioner. No

identification of the article has been made. It is submitted that if

the motive behind commission of crime was to robe only then why

a person will took with him cash book and voucher book which

would pay him nothing except Rs. 5 or 10. It is strenuously urged

that there was no evidence prior to his arrest and now the case of

the prosecution rests upon post arrest evidence which are not

conclusively pointing towards the guilt of the accused. It is further

contended that assuming for a moment that these cash books and

note books etc. belongs to temple even then it cannot be

presumed that robbery and murder was committed at the same

time. The only presumption available under section 114 of Indian

Evidence Act would be that either the accused stole the property

or received the same knowing it to be stolen. The recoveries are

not proved. He placed reliance on the judgment passed by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanwat Khan & Anr. Vs.

State of Raj. Reported in AIR 1956 SC 54 and Sharad Birdhi

Chand Sarda Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in AIR 1984

SC 1622). The fact of recovery has been seriously questioned by

urging that the same was planted against the accused with a view

to connect him with the alleged crime only. He is behind the bars

since long. The circumstances appearing in this case are not

pointing towards the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with his

innocence. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him

behind the bars.

3.

Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General opposed the

bail application.

4.

Heard. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel

for the parties and looking to the possibility that the trial may take

(3 of 3)

(cRLMB-14659/2022)

long time to conclude, this court deems it just and proper to

enlarge the petitioner on bail.

5.

Accordingly, the second bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner-

Surendra Singh @ Bablu Son Of Shri Bhawani Singh shall be

enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum

of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the

satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before

the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called

upon to do so.

(FARJAND ALI),J

Anu /