In a bail application for offences under Sections 302 IPC and related provisions, the High Court of Rajasthan rejected the plea. The court declined to grant bail citing the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence without expressing an opinion on merits.
Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10349/2019
Megha Ram S/o Dhanna Garasiya, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Gogrund Fala Ubra Police Station Bekariya, District Udaipur (Raj.) (Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Awar Dan Ujjwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. AR Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
04/09/2019
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 28/2017 of Police Station, Bekariya, District Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323/149, 302 IPC and 4/25 Arms Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is to the effect that he along with co-accused entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted the deceased Kapuriya. It is argued that though the police has shown recovery of knife at the instance of the petitioner, but complainant PW-1, in his court statements, has specifically stated that the police had recovered the knife along
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-10349/2019]
with dead body from the scene of crime. It is submitted that from the above statements of the complainant, it is clear that the recovery of knife shown by the police, at the instance of the petitioner, is false. It is submitted that in view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the complainant PW-1 in his statements before the court, has specifically stated that the petitioner had inflicted injury on the shoulder of the deceased Kapuriya and from the postmortem report, it is clear that the said injury was fatal which resulted into death of him. It is submitted that it cannot be said that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
SURABHII/21-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. given the gravity of the offence and absence of merit-based opinion.
Whether the false recovery of weapon asserted by petitioner warrants bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Megha Ram
State
Vijay Bishnoi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
