Allowed

Adil Son of Hazi Subhan Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Jul 2022CRLMB/4426/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Sameer Jain allowed a bail application filed by a 20-year-old accused accused of murder and rioting under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court emphasized the length of custody, lack of prior criminal record, existence of cross-FIRs, and completion of investigation.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail to the accused-applicant upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Adil Son of Hazi Subhan Khan 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. 4426/2022

¶3

Adil Son Of Hazi Subhan Khan, Resident Of Village Ubarka, Police Station Tapukara, District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Tijara Alwar)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh Sunda For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP Mr. Aditya Kiran Mathur, for complainant

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶10

Order

¶11

Judgment Reserved on 10.07.2022

¶12

Judgment Pronounced on 22.07.2022

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-applicant Adil son of Hazi Subhan Khan. The applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No.170/2021 registered at Police Station Tapukara Police (Bhiwadi) District Alwar for the offence(s) under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 302 IPC and Section 3/25 & 5/27 of Arms Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that applicant is a young man aged 20 years, who has been falsely implicated in the matter. He is in judicial custody since 29.05.2021. He has not committed alleged crime nor is he remotedly involved in the matter. The dispute pertains to rivalry between two neighbours and relatives over a piece of one bigha

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLMB-4426/2022]

¶17

land which was purchased by the complainant side on higher rate over which a dispute arose which was converted into a spur of the moment fight on 28.05.2021 and during the fight both sides were attacking each other. Both the sides used bamboo sticks and other weapons. The present applicant is alleged to have used local pistol to fire shot/bullet in the chest of Amit, which resulted in his death. Learned counsel has further submitted that cross FIRs were registered in this matter. The dispute/altercation happened over a piece of land and the accused-applicant acted in self-defence. The deceased, Amit, died during the course of fight. The provisions invoked by the prosecution are not applicable and the matter may be viewed from the angle of self-defence and the applicant be enlarged on bail. Further, police has completed the investigation and submitted the Challan/Final Report, nothing is to be recovered from the applicant and hence continued detention of applicant is not required.

¶18

Per contra , the complainants have submitted that recovery of pistol has been effected from the accused-applicant under Section 27. The post mortem report on record is suggestive that death happened because of the gun shot. The gun shot was fired with the intention to kill the deceased and not in selfdefence.

¶19

Heard the arguments advanced by both the sides and scanned the record of the case. It is observed that the incident took place on 28.05.2021. There was a severe fight amongst the group of persons between complainant and the applicant. Both the sides have used bamboo sticks, etc. It is on record that relatives of the applicant were also injured severely. The dispute was pertaining to some land in question. The applicant and the

¶20

(3 of 3)

¶21

[CRLMB-4426/2022]

¶22

complainant are neighbours as well as relatives. The accusedapplicant has no criminal antecedents, he is a young man, 20 years of age. Cross FIRs were filed by both the sides. Vide order dated 20.09.2021, passed in S.B. Criminal Bail Application No.15234/2021, some of the co-accused, against whom chargesheet was filed under Section 302, 323 and 341 IPC, were released on bail. In the present case also, Challan/Final Report is submitted. Applicant is in custody since 29.05.2021 and conclusion of trial is likely to take long time.

¶23

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the sides, looking to the length of the custody, but without commenting on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to allow the bail application for the reasons as stated above.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Adil son of Hazi Subhan Khan shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶26

JKP/10

Adil Son of Hazi Subhan Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adil Son of Hazi Subhan Khan 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

Babbu Saini S/O Parbhu Dayal Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranjeet Choudhary S/O Shri Motiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Taranpreet Kaur D/O Surendra Singh W/O Jaspreet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Rawat Son of Shri Girdhari Rawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Karma Devi W/O Ramsavroop Vs State of Rajasthan

Sayeed Wasim Ali Son of Sayeed Noor Ali Vs the State of Rajasthan