Partly allowed

Ram Pratap v. State

Rajasthan HC1 Feb 2022CRLMB/881/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Cr.P.C. Section 439 filed by two accused facing IPC offences including Sections 307, 323, 341, 325, 380 and 143, the Court noted that only one petitioner pressed for bail. Finding that no grievous injuries are attributed to him and noting the delay in trial, the Court granted bail to one petitioner while dismissing the other's application.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner No.1 released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of ₹25,000 each; Petitioner No.2's application dismissed as not pressed.

Ram Pratap Vs State — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 881/2022

¶3

Ram Pratap S/o Ghamanda Ram, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Padalbas, Jasrasar, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner. (At Present Lodged in Central Jail, Bikaner).

¶4

Mala Ram S/o Ram Pratap, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Padalbas, Jasrasar, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner. (At Present Lodged in Central Jail, Bikaner).

----Petitioners

Versus

State through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.R. Godara through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.R. Choudhary, PP Mr. S.K. Poonia for the complainant through VC

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

¶11

Order

¶12

01/02/2022

¶13

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, as per guidelines, lawyers have been advised to refrain from coming to the Courts, therefore, hearing of the matter is being taken up only through video conferencing.

¶14

The present bail application has 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.151/2021 of Police Station Jasrasar (Bikaner) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 380, 143, 307, 325 of IPC.

¶15

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel for the complainant through video conferencing

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CRLMB-881/2022]

¶18

and learned Public Prosecutor, present in person. Perused the material available on record.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner No.2 – Mala Ram at this stage.

¶20

Accordingly, the present bail application preferred by the petitioner No.2 – Mala Ram S/o Ram Pratap under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as not pressed at this stage.

¶21

So far as the petitioner No.1 – Ram Pratap S/o Ghamanda Ram is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that cross FIRs have been filed by both the side; there is dispute of wall between the parties; it is a case of free fight; as per prosecution, petitioner Ram Pratap came with lathi and Mala Ram with gandasi ; no specific injury which is found dangerous to life or grievous in nature on vital part of the body is attributed to the petitioner Ram Pratap; petitioner Ram Pratap is behind the bars since 31.12.2021; and trial of the case will take long time. With these submissions learned counsel for the petitioner prays that benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner No.1 – Ram Pratap S/o Ghamanda Ram.

¶22

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing for the complainant vehemently and fervently opposed the bail application of the accused – petitioner No.1 - Ram Pratap and stated that lathi recovered from the petitioner; injury of lathi caused to Lichiram; petitioner Ram Pratap actively participated in the quarrel.

¶23

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, particularly to the facts that injury No.2 of Gopal which is found dangerous to life not attributed to the petitioner Ram Pratap but

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CRLMB-881/2022]

¶26

to accused petitioner No.2 – Mala Ram; none of injury which is found grievous in nature attributed to the petitioner; petitioner is behind the bars since more than one month; further investigation and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner No.1 – Ram Pratap S/o Ghamanda Ram deserves to be accepted.

¶27

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is partly allowed and it is directed that petitioner No.1 - Ram Pratap S/o Ghamanda Ram , arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.151/2021 of Police Station Jasrasar (Bikaner), shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of ₹50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) and two sureties of 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five₹ Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶28

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

¶29

84-Arvind/-

Ram Pratap v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Pratap v. State

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

Keshu Ram @ Kesha Ram Vs State

Shahrukh Vs State

Surendra Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Maan Singh @ Monu Vs State

Imran Vs State of Rajasthan

Nitin Jatav Vs State of Rajasthan