Allowed

Jeewan Chodhary Son of Sugna Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Sept 2022CRLMB/7122/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. considering procedural irregularities in the investigation, late information to the Ilaka Magistrate, and a co-accused being on bail without adjudicating the case merits.

What did the court decide?

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

Jeewan Chodhary Son of Sugna Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7122/2022

¶3

Jeewan Chodhary Son Of Sugna Choudhary, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Village Indoli, P.S. Arai, District Ajmer (At Present Accused Confined In Jail Ajmer)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka, Adv. For State(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta, Adv.

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶9

Order

¶10

08/09/2022

¶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. 231/2021 registered at Police Station Arai District Ajmer for the offence(s) under Sections 320 and 120B of IPC.

¶12

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that it is only on account of the extra judicial confession of coaccused that the accused-applicant was arrested. There is clear lack of motive on part of present accused-applicant. Nothing is to be recovered from accused-applicant and his role in the alleged incident is limited. The Ilaka Magistrate was informed about the report, in contrast to provisions of Section 157 Cr.P.C., at a belated stage. The investigation is tainted and the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter. Learned counsel has relied

¶13

(2 of 3)

¶14

[CRLMB-7122/2022]

¶15

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 accused-petitioner 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

¶16

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

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application and relied upon the medical report.

¶19

Considered the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties.

¶20

Considering the fact that Rojnamcha Entry 41 reflects recording of videography which has not been marked as evidence along with the charge-sheet, that the Ilaka Magistrate has been informed at a belated stage and that the co-accused Mohammad Lukman has been enlarged on bail as well as 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.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Jeewan Chodhary Son Of Sugna Choudhary shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

[CRLMB-7122/2022]

¶24

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

Raghu/4

Jeewan Chodhary Son of Sugna Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeewan Chodhary Son of Sugna Choudhary 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

Mohammad Lukman S/O Badruddin Vs State of Rajasthan

Arish Son of Hasan Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan

Shyoji Son of Chauthu Vs State of Rajasthan