Application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in murder and impersonation case dismissed. Court rejected arguments regarding hostile witness, failure to identify petitioner, and postmortem report discrepancies due to gravity of charges and remaining prosecution evidence.
Bail application dismissed.
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 BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 12221/2021 Rajendra Kumar Yadav S/o Ramesh Chand, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Ghevta, Police Station Manoharpur, District Jaipur, At Present House No. 130, Laxmi Nagar-8 Akhepura, Police Station Vishvakarma, Jaipur West, (Rajasthan) (At Present Central Jail Jaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Non-Petitioner
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Nikhil Sharma for |
|---|---|
| Mr. Shresth Vardhan | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. F.R. Meena,PP |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order
15/12/2021
The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.220/2020 registered at Police Station Harmara, District Jaipur for the offence(s) under Section(s) 302 & 201 of I.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecution witness Babulal Bunkar (PW 3) has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution story. He submitted that another prosecution witness Ajit Singh Yadav (PW 6) has not identified the petitioner and his cross-examination reveals that corrections were made in his statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Learned counsel contended that even the dead body has not been identified to be that of Pooja, wife of the petitioner. Drawing attention of this Court towards the postmortem report of the deceased, learned
(2 of 3)
[CRLMB-12221/2021]
counsel submitted that no definite cause of death has been assigned therein. He, therefore, prayed for release of the petitioner on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.
Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
The first bail application of the petitioner filed after submission of the charge-sheet, was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23.10.2020 after appreciating the submissions raised by learned counsels for the respective parties in the backdrop of material available in the charge-sheet. Thereafter, six prosecution witnesses have been examined. Turning up of Babulal Bunkar (PW 3) hostile, is of no assistance to the petitioner inasmuch as he has seen the dead body only and has informed the police accordingly. It is not in dispute that a dead body has been recovered from the place visited by the PW 3. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ajit Singh Yadav (PW 6) has not identified the petitioner, does not merit acceptance at this stage. He has specifically stated in his examination-in-chief that in the night of 06.05.2020, he supplied 2 litres of petrol in a plastic bottle to a person travelling in a Pickup. Even otherwise also, the statement of Ajit Singh Yadav (PW 6) recorded under Section 161 CrPC does not reveal any correction or any manipulation therein. It is revealed from the material on record that the aforesaid incident got recorded in the CCTV footage at the petrol pump which is part of the charge-sheet. Besides, important prosecution witnesses including the Investigating Officer are yet to be examined. Landlord of the petitioner, Shri Praduman Singh Kaviya has deposed in his statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC that the petitioner was not seen in the colony since the morning of 06.05.2020 and when he visited his house on 18.05.2020, he found that the petitioner has already vacated it. Another prosecution
(3 of 3)
[CRLMB-12221/2021]
witness Shri Babulal Yadav, a distant relative of the petitioner, has deposed that the petitioner took his premises on rent on 10.05.2020 stating that he has vacated his earlier premises in Jaipur. Statement of Shri Babulal Yadav, Pickup owner recorded under Section 161 CrPC shows that on 06.05.2020, the Pickup was in possession of the petitioner. Statement of Shri Satyanarayan Sharma recorded under Section 161 CrPC reveals that the motorcycle used in commission of offence was purchased by the petitioner from its registered owner, Kailash Chand. Besides the aforesaid incriminating evidence, on the information furnished by the accused-petitioner under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872, the motorcycle used in commission of offence, the plastic bottle in which petrol used for burning the dead body, was collected, the place of incident, the place where the dead body was burnt, have been recovered.
In view thereof, merely because the prosecution witness Babulal Bunkar (PW 3) has turned hostile or another prosecution witness Ajit Singh Yadav (PW 6) has not identified the petitioner, is of no help to him. Other contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding non-identification of the dead body and nondisclosure of cause of death in the postmortem report, are subject matter of consideration during trial of the case.
Therefore, in view of the gravity of allegation against the petitioner and the fact that material prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined, this Court is not inclined to extend the petitioner benefit of bail.
Resultantly, the second bail application is dismissed.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
PRAGATI/3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of murder and impersonation given the alleged lack of court identification by one witness and alleged hostility of another.
Whether the postmortem report's lack of definite cause of death affects the bail decision.
Whether the turning hostile of a prosecution witness who saw a dead body entitles the accused to bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Rajendra Kumar Yadav
State Of Rajasthan
Mahendar Kumar Goyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
