Allowed

Bipul Sheel S/O Boloram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Sept 2023CRLMB/7677/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. arising from a murder (Sections 302 and 201 IPC), the single-judge High Court allowed the petition, directing release on bond after considering arguments regarding incomplete prosecution evidence and circular complaints.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Bipul Sheel S/O Boloram Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7677/2023

¶3

Bipul Sheel S/o Boloram, Aged About 31 Years, Residence Shishabgudi, Vaya Devnahat, Police Station Koochbihar, West Bengal Presently Tenant 61/406 Heera Path Mansarovar (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Jaipur)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohd. Umar Farooq For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.K. Sheoran, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶10

Order

¶11

15/09/2023

¶12

Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶13

F.I.R. No. 925/2022 was registered at Police Station Muhana, District Jaipur City South for offences under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel for the petitioner submits that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence but no incriminating evidence is appearing against the petitioner in the chargesheet. Counsel further submits that initially missing report was filed by the complainant dated 17.7.2022, wherein nothing wrong was alleged against the petitioner and the dead body of the deceased was

¶15

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-7677/2023]

¶16

recovered on 21.7.2022. Thereafter, present FIR has been filed dated 5.8.2022, wherein suspicion was raised against the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that police has made two recoveries at the instance of the petitioner i.e. two mobile phones and one silver ring belonging to the deceased. Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of trial, complainant has been examined as PW-1 and clearly admitted the fact that mobile phones had already been recovered dated 21.7.2022 when dead body was recovered. Complainant has also admitted this fact that silver ring was shown to him prior to identification of article. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that only one witness has been examined out of 35 cited witnesses. He further submits that petitioner is in custody sinc e 6.8.2022 and trial will take considerable time.

¶17

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this bail application and submits that on the information furnished by the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, recoveries have been effected at the instance of petitioner.

¶18

I have considered the contentions.

¶19

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and complainant clearly admitted the fact that mobile phones of the deceased were already recovered dated 21.7.2022 and period of custody, but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶20

[CRLMB-7677/2023]

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶23

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶24

ANAND TANWAR /62

Bipul Sheel S/O Boloram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipul Sheel S/O Boloram 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

Pawan Singh S/O Shri Samay Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Abhishek Son of Prem Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Shaitan Jat and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Kapil Dev Son of Shri Shambhu Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Akbar Khan S/O Shri Kamruddin Khan Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ravinder Singh S/O Rajendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan