The High Court of Rajasthan rejected bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for three accused convicted of dacoity, citing the gravity of the offence and lack of fit case, though noting they may re-apply after eye-witness statement.
Bail applications rejected; leave granted to file fresh application after recording eye-witness statement.
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 Misc. Bail Application No. 6155/2021
Lokesh S/o Naresh Chandra Patel, Aged 20 Years, R/o Sagrod,
Police Thana Sadar, Banswara, District Banswara.
(Accused Lodge At Dist. Jail Banswara).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan through P.P.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5971/2021
Rahul S/o Annadag, Aged 25 Years, R/o Sagrod, P.S. Sadar, Banswara, District Banswara.
(Accused Lodge At Dist. Jail, Banswara).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8424/2021
Ejaj Ulla Khan S/o Niyamat Ulla Khan Pathan, Aged 21 Years, R/o Indira Colony, District Banswara.
(Presently Lodged In Jail Banswara).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parikshit Nayak Mr. Raghuveer Singh Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Singh, P.P.
(2 of 3)
[CRLMB-6155/2021]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Order
05/08/2021
The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who are in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No. 123/2021, Police Station Thana Sadar, District Banswara, registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code against the accusedpetitioners Lokesh and Rahul and for the offences punishable under Sections 394/34, 395 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code against the accused-petitioner Ejaj Ulla Khan.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that no recovery has been made from the accused-petitioners; recovery has been made from other co-accused; as per page No.41 and 42 of the charge-sheet recovery of approximately Rs.15 to 16 lakhs has been made; no identification parade in respect of the accusedpetitioners; that name of accused-petitioner Ejaj Ulla Khan not mentioned in the conclusion of the charge-sheet; charge-sheet has been filed; and that trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications and stated that accused-petitioners worked at petrol pump and with the connivance of accused-petitioners Rahul and Lokesh, dacoity of Rs. 20 lakhs has been made, out of which, only Rs.15 to 16 lakhs has been recovered; information has been given
(3 of 3)
[CRLMB-6155/2021]
by accused-petitioner Lokesh which is available at page No.61 of the charge-sheet. Looking to the amount involved in the dacoity, benefit of bail may not granted to the accused-petitioners.
Having regard to 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/demerits of the case, I do not find it fit case for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioners at this stage.
Accordingly, the present bail applications preferred on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner is free to file fresh bail application after recording the statement of the eye witness.
(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J
2-4/akshay/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners accused of dacoity under Section 395 IPC.
Whether the petitioner can apply again for bail after recording the statement of the eye witness.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Lokesh S/o Naresh Chandra Patel
Rahul S/o Annadag
Ejaj Ulla Khan S/o Niyamat Ulla Khan Pathan
State Of Rajasthan
Devendra Kachhawa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
