Allowed

Mohammad Lukman S/O Badruddin v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Sept 2022CRLMB/5227/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench disposed of a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a murder case. The court observed procedural irregularities in the FIR registration and investigation sequence, finding the accused falsely implicated. The court enlarged the accused on bail by accepting a personal bond and sureties without commenting on the merits.

What did the court decide?

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

Mohammad Lukman S/O Badruddin 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. 5227/2022

¶3

Mohammad Lukman S/o Badruddin, Aged About 26 Years, Village Sambhar Road, Narena, Police Station Narena, District Jaipur Rural (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The P.P.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. K. Gupta, Sr. Adv. assisted by Ms. Savita Nathawal, Adv. Mr. Anurag Pareek, Adv. For State(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta, Adv.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶10

Order

¶11

08/09/2022

¶12

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. 231/2021 registered at Police Station Arai District Ajmer for the offence(s) under Sections 302 and 120B of IPC.

¶13

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter. The FIR registered on 25/11/2021 at 23.39 IST itself reveals that brother of the deceased had himself stated that the deceased had gone in the car of the accused-applicant and after leaving the accused-applicant, he had gone to Narena. Learned counsel further submitted that the FIR itself has reflected absence of the accused-applicant. Learned counsel relied upon the Rojnamcha

¶14

(2 of 4)

¶15

[CRLMB-5227/2022]

¶16

Report 006 wherein it was informed that one person was lying on road on account of accident. Learned counsel also relied upon Entry No.041 dated 25/11/2021 timed 11.19 PM wherein the Car was seized by the Police and was videographed. The said Rojnamcha Report has declared that the deceased did not die on the spot but had died during the course of treatment in the hospital. He also submitted that the FIR is registered at a belated stage i.e. on 25/11/2021 at 23:39 IST as per Rojnamcha. As per him, in-spite of the fact that the Car was seized on 25/11/2021, the First Inspection Report is dated 26.11.2021. He submitted that the investigation has preceded the FIR, the testimony to that effect is reflected from the postmortem report dated 25/11/2021 which is timed at 10.55 AM. He has relied upon judgment of the Apex Court rendered in Ramesh Baburao Devaskar & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra: (2007) 13 SCC 501 which has held that if the FIR is registered after the inquest report, the same is tainted and vitiates the investigation. He has submitted that the accusedpetitioner has been falsely implicated in the matter. He has also relied upon the judgment rendered by this Court in Pancha Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan: 1985WLN(UC)582 more particularly Para 22 which reads as under:-

¶17

“22. It is clear from the aforesaid statement, investigation in the case has already commenced and once investigation commences the FIR is hit by Section 162 Cr.P.C. and no value can be attached to the same.”

¶18

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has also relied upon “Supurdgi Lash” wherein brother of the deceased was handed over the body on 11:50 AM on 25/11/2021 which is prior to the investigation. He has also submitted that the videography conducted on 25/11/2021 has reflected that Rojnamcha Entry 41

¶19

(3 of 4)

¶20

[CRLMB-5227/2022]

¶21

is not placed alongwith charge-sheet and is registered as an evidence. A false case has been made out and a pre-concocted story is presented by the prosecution. He has submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the accused-applicant has no role to play in the matter.

¶22

Per-contra , Learned Public Prosecutor has also opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the FIR was submitted to the authorities on 25/11/2021 itself. The delay was only on account of entering it in the proper format. Therefore, it cannot be said that the FIR was registered at a belated stage. He has drawn attention of this Court to the medical report and submitted that there are multiple injuries of serious nature caused to the deceased.

¶23

I have considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties.

¶24

On perusal of the FIR, wherein role of the accusedapplicant is not specified, the videography made is not brought on record, the Ilaka Magistrate was informed about registration of the FIR at belated stage and that the charge-sheet has been filed and no recovery is to be made from the accused-applicant, therefore, 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 inclined to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Mohammad Lukman S/o Badruddin 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

¶26

(4 of 4)

¶27

[CRLMB-5227/2022]

¶28

Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶29

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶30

Raghu/2

Mohammad Lukman S/O Badruddin v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Lukman S/O Badruddin 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

Surjaram Jat S/O Shri Aaidanram Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkishan Gurjar Son of Shri Madan Lal Alias Magna Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Tasleem S/O Habeeb Vs State of Rajasthan

Jeewan Chodhary Son of Sugna Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Arish Son of Hasan Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan

Shyoji Son of Chauthu Vs State of Rajasthan