Allowed

Fusa Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Nov 2022CRLMB/10441/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The High Court relied on the fact that the complainant admitted in his court statement that the petitioner was not named in the FIR or his police statement, leading to false implication despite long custodial detention.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail by executing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Fusa Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous III Bail Application No. 10441/2022

¶3

Fusa Ram S/o Chima Ram, Aged About 22 Years, B/c Jaat, R/o Khar Ki Beri, Adel, P.s. Rageshwari Gas Terminal, Rawli Nadi, Dist. Barmer (Raj.). (Currently Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur And Behind The Bar Since 20-8-2020 (537 Day)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M. M. Dhera For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gouri, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Order

¶10

04/11/2022

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶12

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.93/2020 of Police Station Rageshwari Gas Terminal, Rawli Nadi, District Barmer for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 365, 342, 394, 302 and 149. He has preferred this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after rejection of the earlier bail applications of the petitioner, statement of complainant Premaram has been recorded as PW-03, wherein he has admitted that in the FIR, the petitioner has not been named and even in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the accused person is named as Fusaram @ Fuaram S/o Kheta Ram, whereas the name of petitioner’s father is Chima Ram. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[CRLMB-10441/2022]

¶16

as a matter of fact, the petitioner was not involved in commission of any crime and his name has falsely been implicated which is clear from the statement of complainant PW-03. It is also submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.08.2020 and trial against him has not been concluded till date, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and after taking into consideration the fact that the complainant in his written FIR as well as in his police statement has not named the petitioner and he has admitted the same in his court statement, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶19

Accordingly, this third bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Fusa Ram S/o Chima Ram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.93/2020 of Police Station Rageshwari Gas Terminal, Rawli Nadi, District Barmer provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶20

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶21

71-AjaySingh/-

Fusa Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fusa Ram 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

Smt. Harjas Kaur Vs State of Raj. and Anr.

Banne Singh Vs State

Shivraj Vs State of Rajasthan

Om Prakash Vs State and Ors.

State Vs Rajendra Kumar and Ors.

Lal Singh Rajput Vs State of Rajasthan