Dismissed

Kapil Kumar S/O Shri Amarchand v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Oct 2022CRLMB/12071/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for an offence under Section 306 IPC, the High Court of Rajasthan held that considering the relationship between the accused and victim and eyewitness statements, the case does not support discharge at this stage. The court rejected the appellant's reliance on a Supreme Court precedent as factually distinguishable and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; accused-applicant remains in custody.

Kapil Kumar S/O Shri Amarchand Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12071/2022

¶3

Kapil Kumar S/o Shri Amarchand, Aged About 23 Years, Resident of Vill. Sumel Police Station Malakhera Alwar Distt. Alwar (Raj.) (Petitioner is in J.C. In Jail Alwar)

¶4

Accused----Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, through P.P.

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta For State(s) : Mr. Sher Singh Mehla, PP For Complainant : Mr. Krishan Kumar Chhawal

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶9

Order

¶10

10/10/2022

¶11

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No.448/2022 registered at Police Station Malakhera District Alwar for the offence(s) under Section 306 of IPC.

¶12

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has submitted that the accused-applicant is a young boy aged 18 years, who has been falsely implicated in the matter. It is submitted that the applicant is in custody since 22.07.2022. The charge-sheet has been filed. Learned counsel has further submitted that two sets of FIRs were lodged on different dates i.e. 28.06.2022 and 29.06.2022. Thus, the report in the instant matter is an after thought to falsely implicate the accusedapplicant. Moreover, there is no dying declaration or a suicide

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLMB-12071/2022]

¶15

note. Learned counsel has further submitted that there are no criminal antecedents pending against the accused-applicant. It is also submitted that ingredients of Section 306 IPC are not made out as in the facts of the instant matter, there is no instigation to commit suicide. He has also relied upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Indrajeet Kandu reported in (2019) 10 SCC 188 decided on 18.10.2019, wherein it was held that merely words said in fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation.

¶16

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the accused-applicant was in close relation/proximity with the deceased and they were in a love relationship for a long period of time. It is further submitted that the present incident has occurred on account of denial of marriage by the accused-applicant. Hence, the applicant is fully responsible for the victim’s demise. He has also submitted that as per statements of eye-witnesses, it is a clear case of instigation, as the incident has occurred only on account of the denial of marriage Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, Section 306 of IPC cannot be ruled out at this stage.

¶17

Considering the arguments advanced by both the sides, considering the record of the case, considering that the accusedapplicant and the victim were in a love relationship for a long period of time, considering the statements tendered by the eyewitnesses.

¶18

(3 of 3)

¶19

[CRLMB-12071/2022]

¶20

Further, the judgment relied upon by the counsel for the accused-applicant is based on different footing and is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the instant matter and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not inclined to allow the bail application at

¶21

this stage.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed at this
stage.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
JKP/24

Kapil Kumar S/O Shri Amarchand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Kumar S/O Shri Amarchand 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Choudhary S/O Bhanwarlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shankar S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajjak Khan S/O Sher Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan

Ravi @ Mota S/O Daulatram Vs State of Rajasthan

Sabir S/O Sukka Vs State of Rajasthan

Jairam S/O Banna Lal Vs State of Rajasthan