Dismissed

Mohan Lal S/Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC29 Nov 2021CRLMB/11114/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses the petitioner's fourth bail application under Section 439 CrPC. The court held that since no material change in circumstances occurred after the dismissal of the third application and only four witnesses remain to be examined, granting bail was not just or proper.

What did the court decide?

The fourth bail application filed by the petitioner Mohan Lal is dismissed.

Mohan Lal S/Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 4th Bail Application No. 11114/2021

¶3

Mohan Lal S/o Ramlal, R/o Badh Ki Dhani Kachroda Police Station Phulera Dist. Jaipur (Accused In Sub District Jail Sambharlake)

¶4

----Accused Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.R. Goyal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA Order

¶10

29/11/2021

¶11

This 4th bail application has been filed under Section

¶12

439 CrPC.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 3rd bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20.5.2020. He further submits that when the statement of 19 witnesses were recorded, the prosecution in the garb of sanction filed an application under Section 216 CrPC for amending the charge, which was allowed by the trial court vide order dated 16.4.2021 and the charge under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act was also framed against the petitioner. On account of amending the charge, all the prosecution witnesses have been recalled. The prosecution wants to prolong the trial. The petitioner is innocent and he is in judicial custody since the past 8 years and 4 months. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Learned PP appearing for the State has opposed the same and submits that there are total 33 witnesses in this case. Now only 4 witnesses are yet to be examined. The matter had also

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMB-11114/2021]

¶17

remained stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for two years. He further submits that 3rd bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court by a detailed order dated 20.5.2020. After rejection of the 3rd bail application, there is no change in the circumstances except that the statements of some more witnesses have been recorded. Hence the petitioner should not be granted bail.

¶18

Heard.

¶19

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties and more particularly in view of the fact that after rejection of 3rd bail application, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case and now only 4 more witnesses are yet to be examined, I do not deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner.

¶20

Accordingly, the 4th bail application filed by the petitioner Mohan Lal S/o Ramlal is dismissed.

¶21

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶22

DK/4

Mohan Lal S/Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Lal S/Ramlal 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

Neha Gupta D/O Shri Mukesh Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Maggo Vs State

State of Rajasthan Vs Bherulal

Ali Mohammad Son of Shri Habula Vs State of Rajasthan

Fauji @ Salman S/O Sh. Kamruddin Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramsingh Yadav S/O Shri Deburam Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan