Rajasthan High Court dismissed a third bail application under Section 439 CrPC in a case of attempted murder and gun offenses. The court held that releasing the petitioner would affect the ongoing trial and denied bail despite superficial injuries.
The third bail application is dismissed. Trial shall be concluded within three months.
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 IIIrd Bail Application No. 1976/2021
Balister @ balu S/o Bharosi, Aged About 42 Years, Har Roop Ka Beda, Mudiya, Poice Station, Balghat, District Karauli (Raj.) (At Present Accused Confined In Sub-Jail, Hindaun City, District Karauli).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
| ----Respondent | |
|---|---|
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. S.K. Gupta, with Mr. Rajneesh Gupta |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP Mr. M.M. Ranjan Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rohan Aggarwal |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Order
08/02/2021
This third bail application has been filed under Section 439 CrPC in connection with FIR No. 77/2020 registered at Police Station- Balghat, Dist. Karauli for the offences under Section 307/34 of IPC and Section 3/25 and 5/25 of Arms Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as complainant and learned Public Prosecutor.
This third bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner after recording of the evidence of the concerned doctor who had conducted medical examination of the injured wintesses Manjeet and Devendra.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the statement made by the concerned Doctor, it is apparent that
(2 of 3)
[CRLMB-1976/2021]
injuries which have been caused by fire arm were superficial and simple and both the injured persons were not even admitted as indoor patients and there is no born injury found and as per the x- ray report there were metallic pellets on the body of Manjeet and there were metallic pellets on the body of Devendra. Learned counsel submits that co-accused has already been granted bail and the petitioner is in jail since 7.5.2020.
Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the accused petitioner is the person who has used fire arm which resulted in the injuries being caused on two persons. The nature of injuries might be simple but the very act of using fire arm would show that there was intention to kill and cause death and therefore case under Section 307 IPC is clearly made out.
At this stage, this court is not looking into nature of injuries to ascertain the offences made out against the petitioner.
Learned Public Prosecutor submits that charges under Section 307/34 IPC has been framed against the petitioner.
I have considered the submissions.
Charge has been framed against the petitioner on 20.11.2020. Trial is proceeding at this stage. Any comment in relation to the statement of doctor recorded before the court may affect the trial.
In the opinion of this court, looking into the allegations of the petitioner having used fire arm twice to cause injuries to two persons, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. However the trial may be concluded within a period of three months.
(3 of 3)
[CRLMB-1976/2021]
The third bail application is dismissed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
ashu /31
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the third bail application should be allowed given the allegations of using a firearm and the trial stage.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Balister @ balu S/o Bharosi
State Of Rajasthan
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
