Allowed

Ranjeet S/O Rameshwar Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 May 2022CRLMB/4756/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The High Court deemed it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail, coordinating with a co-ordinate bench that had granted bail to other accused involved in the same incident where specific injuries were attributed to different accused.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Ranjeet S/O Rameshwar Gurjar 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. 4756/2022

¶3

Ranjeet S/o Rameshwar Gurjar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Gedupura, Thana Sadar, Hindaun City, District Karauli (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Hindaun City)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Timan Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.S. Rathore, GA-cum-AAG Mr. Vikram Singh Chauhan for complainant

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶9

Order

¶10

07/05/2022

¶11

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C in connection with FIR No.373/2021 registered at Police Station Sadar Hindaun City, District Karauli for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 307 & 302 of IPC.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no specific overt-act has been attributed to the petitioner and the similarly situated co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail and the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable to them. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since 10.02.2022 and the supplementary charge-sheet has already been filed. The petitioner has criminal antecedents of two cases, in which, he is on bail. Hence, the petitioner may kindly be released on bail.

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLMB-4756/2022]

¶15

Learned Government Advocate-cum-Additional

¶16

Advocate General and learned counsel for the complainant both have opposed the bail application. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the injury No.8 of the deceased Dulli Gurjar was caused by the petitioner and the bail application of coaccused Murari has already been dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.11.2021 with liberty to file afresh, after examination of material witnesses. Hence, the bail application of the petitioner may be rejected.

¶17

Heard. Perused the material available on the record.

¶18

The bail applications of co-accused Veer Singh & Ors. have already been granted by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.11.2021 and in that order, it has been observed that “ as per medical opinion, death of deceased occurred due to multiple fire arm injuries which were specifically attributed to accused Dhara Singh and Mahesh and no other injured have received any injury endangering to life .”

¶19

As per Post-Mortem Report, opinion with regard to cause of death is that “ deceased died due to multiple firearm injuries, caused damage of left-lungs, heart and large intestine. Internal hemorrhage injuries implicated upon body are sufficient to cause death in ordinary course, ante-mortem in nature .”

¶20

As per charge-sheet, Dhara Singh and Mahesh fired on deceased Dulli Gurjar, thereby he died and at the instance of the present petitioner, one ‘Lathi’ was recovered. After investigation, supplementary charge-sheet has not been filed against the petitioner for the offence under the Arms Act. The bail applications of co-accused Rameshwar & Veer Singh & Ors. have already been

¶21

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-4756/2022]

¶22

granted by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 22.11.2021 & 10.11.2021 respectively. Therefore, looking to the above facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner Ranjeet S/o Rameshwar Gurjar shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶24

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶25

Satyendra/13

Ranjeet S/O Rameshwar Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet S/O Rameshwar Gurjar 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

Dinesh Kumar Jhajharia @ Dj S/O Harphool Jhajharia Vs State of Rajasthan

Gulvati W/O Shri Roopram Neena Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra S/O Pappuram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul Sharma S/O Pramod Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Madan Lal Son of Shri Richpal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gopal S/O Onkarlal Vs State of Rajasthan