Dismissed

Tundaram S/O Shrilal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Mar 2024CRLMB/1457/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a bail application filed by an accused under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a murder case, holding that since the petitioner fled from the place of occurrence along with co-accused, he was not entitled to bail at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed with liberty to file fresh bail application after recording of the statement of the material witnesses.

Tundaram S/O Shrilal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:12410]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1457/2024

¶4

Tundaram S/o Shrilal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Jahira, Police Station Bamanwas, Distt. Sawaimadhopur Presently Tenant House No. 31-32, Baba Nahar Singh Colony, Goner Road, Police Station Khonagoriyan, District Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Kawal Singh Loha
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	C. G. Chopra-PP
	Mr.	Sudhir Kumar, SHO, PS SMSH

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order

¶11

12/03/2024

¶12

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner Tundaram S/o Shrilal. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.524/2023 registered at Police Station Khonagoriyan (Jaipur) for the offence(s) under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC.

¶13

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the main allegations of causing death of deceased Hari Prasad are against the other co-accused Lovekhush and Dilkhush. He submits that in the complaint filed by the complainant Omkar, the name of the accused-petitioner is not mentioned. The trial of the case will take considerable time.

[2024:RJ-JP:12410]

[CRLMB-1457/2024]

(2 of 3)

Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accusedpetitioner.

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that accused-petitioner and co-accused caused fatal injuries on deceased Hari Prasad, resulting into his death. He submits that after investigation, police has found that accused-petitioner Tundaram and other co-accused Lovekhush and Dilkhush were sleepping with the deceased Hari Prasad and after committing the offence, all the three persons fled away from the place of occurrence. He further contends that FSL report is still pending in the case, therefore, considering the gravity of the offence, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed.

¶19

Heard and perused the charge-sheet.

¶20

In the complaint, there is specific allegation against coaccused Lovekhush and Dilkhush and other persons that after causing injuries to deceased Hari Prasad, they fled away from the place of occurrence. The complainant under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. has stated that co-accused Lovekhush and Dilkhush and another person were sleepping with the deceased and prior to the incident, altercation took between them. Witness Nangram Meena, in his statement rendered under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. has categorically stated that after causing death of deceased Hari Prasad, his tenant Lovekhush, Dilkhush and Tundaram ran away from the place of incident.

¶21

Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that accused-petitioner and other co-accused were found to be present with the deceased and

[2024:RJ-JP:12410]

[CRLMB-1457/2024]

(3 of 3)

accused-petitioner ran away with the other co-accused, I am not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner Tundaram on bail.

¶26

In view of the above, the present bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner is dismissed with liberty to file fresh bail application after recording of the statement of the material witnesses.

¶27

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶28

33-Rahul Joshi

Tundaram S/O Shrilal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tundaram S/O Shrilal 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

Bijendra @ Birju S/O Gyarsiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Asharam S/O Jamna Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan

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

Sonu S/O Brajesh Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Khursheed S/O Nanhe Khan Vs the State of Rajasthan

Sunil Kumar Jain S/O Shri Tarachand Jain Vs State of Rajasthan