The High Court allowed two bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for accused persons in a murder case, noting no specific injuries were attributed to them and evidence remained largely omnibus.
Petitioners released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each.
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. 4411/2022.
Parveen S/o Shri Poonam Singh, aged about 19 years, R/o Aadi
Wash, Tehsil Jhadol, District Udaipur (Raj.)
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3568/2022.
1. Jitendra Singh S/o Laxman
Singh, aged about 20 years,
R/o Bhakhra, P.S. Bawalwada,
District Udaipur.
2. Parwat Singh @ Prabhu Singh
S/o Amar Singh, by caste
Rajput, aged about 20 years,
B/c Rajput, R/o Bhakhra, P.S.
Bawalwada, District Udaipur.
(Presently Lodged At Central
Jail, Udaipur).
----Petitioners
Versus
The State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
(2 of 5)
[CRLMB-4411/2022]
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. |
Vivek Mathur (No.4411/2022) |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. | Nishant Bora(No.3568/2022) | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. |
Vikram Sharma,PP. |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Order
08/04/2022
Both 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. 190/2021, Police Station Phalasia, District Udaipur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code & under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
While arguing the bail application No. 4411/2022, learned counsel Mr. Vivek Mathur appearing for the petitioner stated that except the statement of Chandan Singh, there is no other evidence against the accused-petitioner; that even as per the statement of Chandan Singh, no specific allegation has been levelled against the present accused-petitioner (Praveen); that the blood stained clothes and knife have been recovered from the coaccused Gunwant Singh @ Gurpal; that as per the postmortem report, the cause of death was stab injury; that the information which was given by the co-accused Gunwant Singh @ Gurpal cannot be read against the accused-petitioner; that the place of occurrence was well within the knowledge of Investigating Officer,
(3 of 5)
[CRLMB-4411/2022]
co-accused Gunwant Singh @ Gurpal and Dungar Singh. It is further stated the knife has been recovered from the co-accused Gurpal Singh; that the sword has been recovered from the coaccused Dungar Singh; that no such weapon has been recovered from the present accused-petitioner; that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 05.11.2021; that the charge-sheet has been filed; and that the trial will take time, therefore, benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and fervently opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner and stated that as per information given by the co-accused Gurpal Singh as well as Dungar Singh, the present accused-petitioner was involved in cross-firing; that there is enmity between present accused-petitioner and Chandan Singh; that each of the accusedpetitioners named other co-accused.
Similarly, while arguing the bail application No. 3568/2022, learned counsel Mr. Nishant Bora appearing for the petitioners stated that even Chandan Singh has not named the present accused-petitioners – Jitendra Singh and Parwat Singh @ Prabhu Singh; that even the co-accused Gurpal Singh has not named the present accused-petitioners; that even co-accused Dungar Singh has named Jeetu, resident of Bhakhra, he has nothing said about Parwat Singh @ Prabhu Singh; that the place of conspiracy and the incident was already within the knowledge of the Investigating Officer; that the place which is already within the knowledge of the Investigating Officer, this fact cannot be find out twice; that only the motorcycle has been recovered from the present accused
(4 of 5)
[CRLMB-4411/2022]
-petitioner Parwat Singh @ Prabhu Singh; that on the basis of recovery of motorcycle, both the accused cannot be held equally responsible and participated in the offence; that as per the postmortem report, the cause of death was stab wound which was attributed to the co-accused Gunwant Singh @ Gurpal; that the knife has been recovered from the co-accused Gurpal Singh; that the sword has been recovered from the co-accused Dungar Singh; that there is no eye witness to the present case; that there is no last seen witness in the matter; that there is no evidence in regard to motive behind the murder; that both the accusedpetitioners are in custody since 02.01.2022; that the charge-sheet has been filed; and that the trial will take time, therefore, benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and fervently opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioners and stated that the motorcycle has been recovered from the accused-petitioner Parwat Singh; that each of the accused named other co-accused; that in fact, all the accused were involved in the conspiracy and offence committed after conspiracy; that as per statement of Chandan Singh, there is enmity between him and the accused-petitioners.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly to the facts that no specific injury has been attributed to the present accused-petitioners; that only omnibus allegations have been levelled against the accused-petitioners; that the charge-sheet has been filed; and that the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the
(5 of 5)
[CRLMB-4411/2022]
merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners deserve to be accepted.
Consequently, both the bail applications are allowed. It is ordered that the petitioners, Parveen S/o Poonam Singh (Bail Application No. 4411/2022), (1) Jitendra Singh S/o Laxman Singh and (2) Parwat Singh @ Prabhu Singh S/o Amar Singh (Bail Application No. 3568/2022), all arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 190/2021, Police Station Phalasia, District Udaipur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J
32-33-Mohan/S.Dhingra
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail is maintainable in murder cases involving young accused who are not specifically implicated in injuries or weapons.
Whether general or omnibus allegations in a charge-sheet justify prolonged bail denial.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Parveen S/o Poonam Singh
The State of Rajasthan
Jitendra Singh S/o Laxman Singh
Parwat Singh @ Prabhu Singh
Deendra Kachhawaha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
