In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. regarding murder and hurt charges, the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur refused bail citing the gravity of allegations that the petitioner inflicted injury with an axe, without deciding merits.
Bail application dismissed; trial to be expedited.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2023/RJJD/016157]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 580/2023
Laxman Singh S/o Dharmendra Singh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Dhandhlawas Tehsil Guda Malani Dist. Barmer Raj. (In J.c. At Sub Jail Balotra Barmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. Jagmal Choudhary, Sr. Advocate with Mr. PradeepChoudhary |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : | Mr. Arun, PP Mr. Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, for the complainant |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Order
18/05/2023
The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.32/2022, Police Station RGT Rawali Nadi Nagar, District Barmer, for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 302/34 of the IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that it is the complainant party who were aggressors in the present matter. It is further submitted that the complainant party with the intention to forcibly encroach upon the land over which, the petitioner was having old and peaceful possession came on site and in self-defence, the incident occurred wherein even the petitioner suffered grievous injuries. It is further submitted that
[2023/RJJD/016157]
[CRLMB-580/2023]
(2 of 3)
in the FIR there is no specific allegation against the present petitioner and a cross-case was also filed on behalf of the petitioner wherein, the investigating agency has already filed charge-sheet against the complainant party. Further, learned counsel submits that the deceased received only one injury and there is no other injury found on his body. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since long and trial of the case will take long time. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel appearing for the complainant opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that with respect to the disputed land, the learned revenue court has already passed orders in favour of the complainant and against the order passed by the revenue court, an appeal is already pending consideration. It is submitted that in the present case, the accused party called upon the complainant party on the fatefull date for the purpose of compromise, but they gave beatings to the complainant party and the present petitioner inflicted injury upon the head of the deceased by blowing an axe. Thus, it is prayed that the bail application may be rejected.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the gravity of the offence wherein specific allegation is levelled against the petitioner that he has inflicted injury upon the head of the deceased by axe, without commenting on the merits
(3 of 3)
[2023/RJJD/016157]
[CRLMB-580/2023]
and demerits of the case, this Court does not find it to be a fit
case for grant of bail to the petitioner, at this stage.
Hence, the bail application is dismissed.
However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the
trial of the case.
A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court either by FAX or by email.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
4-CPGoyal/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving offences under Sections 341, 323 and 302 IPC should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Laxman Singh
State Of Rajasthan
Madan Gopal Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
