Allowed

Gopal @ Gupla S/O Shri Digambar Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Mar 2024CRLMB/1053/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail applications for two accused persons in a case involving offenses under Sections 323, 325, 341, 365, and 34 IPC. The court noted the filing of the charge-sheet, the absence of direct evidence or test identification parades, and the extended period of detention.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted upon furnishing personal bonds of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Gopal @ Gupla S/O Shri Digambar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1053/2024

¶3

Gopal @ Gupla S/o Shri Digambar Singh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Char Thok Jagheena, Police Station Udhyog Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sewar, Bharatpur)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2605/2024 Saurabh S/o Birbal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o 3 Thok Jaghina, P.s. Udhyog Nagar, Bharatpur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur)

¶10

----Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶13

	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Yogesh Singhal Mr.J.K. Moolchandani
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, P.P.

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶15

Order

¶16

11/03/2024

¶17

These bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioners. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.161/2023 registered at Police Station Udhyog Nagar, District Bharatpur for the offence(s) under Sections 323, 341, 325, 365 & 34 IPC.

¶18

[CRLMB-1053/2024]

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the accusedpetitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. There is no evidence against the present accused-petitioners that they have abducted the complainant and, thereafter, caused injuries to him. Learned counsels for the petitioners further submit that no test identification parade was conducted by the prosecution from the complainant and the injured. No incriminating material was recovered from the accused-petitioners indicating their involvement in the alleged crime. Charge-sheet has already been filed against the accused-petitioners. Petitioners are in custody since long and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail applications of the accused-petitioners may be allowed.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and contends that the accused-petitioner Gopal is having criminal antecedents and he was found to be involved in seven other criminal cases. Similarly, accused-petitioner Saurabh was also found to be involved in one criminal case, therefore, looking to the criminal antecedents, the bail applications of the accusedpetitioners may be dismissed.

¶22

Heard and perused the case diary.

¶23

On the perusal of the case diary, it is apparent that Chargesheet has already been filed against the present accusedpetitioners and there is no direct evidence against the accusedpetitioners in active involvement in the alleged crime and no test identification parade was conducted during investigation from the injured Raunak and Gaurav. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, considering the fact that the

¶24

[CRLMB-1053/2024]

¶25

accused-petitioners are in custody since long and trial of the case may take considerable time, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶26

Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners namely; Gopal @ Gupla S/o Shri Digambar Singh & Saurabh S/o Birbal in connection with FIR No161/2023 registered at Police Station Udhyog Nagar, District Bharatpur shall be enlarged on bail provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶28

Brijesh 60-61

Gopal @ Gupla S/O Shri Digambar Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal @ Gupla S/O Shri Digambar Singh 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

Kumarchand S/O Mangalram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Samay Singh S/O Ram Chand Vs the State of Rajasthan

Sumit S/O Raj Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bijendra @ Birju S/O Gyarsiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Asharam S/O Jamna Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Naresh Kumar Meena @ Narsi Meena S/O Shri Hanuman Sahay Meena Vs State of Rajasthan