Allowed

Rajesh Kumar S/O Phoolchand B/C Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jun 2020CRLMB/2212/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving murder and related offences, finding that prima facie his detention could not be continued and ordered him to furnish a bond with a surety.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and one surety in the like amount under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Rajesh Kumar S/O Phoolchand B/C Jat Vs State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2212/2020

¶3

Rajesh Kumar S/o Phoolchand, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No 3 Reengus Tehsil Shri Madhopur Ps Reengus Dist. Sikar Raj. (At Present In Dist. Jail Sikar)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sher Singh Mehla, PP

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶9

Order

¶10

09/06/2020

¶11

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.400/2019 registered at Police Station, Ranoli, District Sikar, for offence under Section(s) 365, 323, 147, 364, 302, 201, 149 and 120-B IPC.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accused petitioner - Rajesh Kumar was neither named in the FIR nor in the inquest report, which has been submitted and the allegation against the petitioner is of having accompany with other persons for the purpose of deleting the CCTV footage, which was recorded at ESSAR Petrol Pump and that he had attempted to delete the said CCTV footage. Learned counsel submits that the case as against the petitioner would not travel upto the offence under Section 201 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC. Learned counsel

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLMB-2212/2020]

¶15

further submits that the petitioner cannot be said to have any knowledge with regard to the earlier incident of murder of couple, which is found to be a case of owner killing.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and pointed out that the petitioner has been seen in the CCTV footage of attempting to delete the footage of earlier date and therefore, it can be presumed that he had knowledge of committing the alleged offence.

¶17

I have considered the submissions as above and as per the charge-sheet, it appears that the accused petitioner – Rajesh Kumar along with Ram Gopal, Babulal, Madan Lal, Sohan Lal and Beerbal had together gone to the petrol pump for deleting the CCTV footage and it is in this manner that the accused petitioner – Rajesh Kumar has made an accused. The issue requires to be examined in trial, however, at this stage, prima facie, I found that the petitioner’s involvement cannot be of such nature for which he should be further detained in custody and therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail. Thus, taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting on merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶18

Therefore, this bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the accused petitioner - Rajesh Kumar S/o Phoolchand be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with aforesaid FIR provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate with the stipulation that he/she shall

¶19

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2212/2020]

¶20

comply with all the conditions laid down under Section 437(3)

¶21

Cr.P.C.

¶22

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶23

SUNIL SOLANKI /19/4

Rajesh Kumar S/O Phoolchand B/C Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar S/O Phoolchand B/C Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Buddhiprakash@Dholya S/O Devlal B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj S/O Ganpatlal Sharma B/C Brahman Vs State of Rajasthan

Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Bhawnesh Kumar Sharma B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Ismail Khan S/O Abdul Hak B/C Muslim Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanji@Kanaram S/O Ramath Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil@Pagya Pandya S/O Shri Phoolchand B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan