Allowed

Biram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Mar 2024CRLMB/1602/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by an accused booked for harbouring persons who committed loot. The court found knowledge of the offence could only be inferred at trial and saw no reason for further incarceration during a likely long trial, granting bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial Judge.

Biram Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:11964]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1602/2024

¶4

Biram S/o Rupa Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Palra, P.s. Adarshnagar, Dist. Ajmer. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail Bhilwara).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Nonepresent
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.K. Bhati,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI Order

¶11

13/03/2024

¶12

Lawyers are abstaining from appearing before the Court.

¶13

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are

¶14

tabulated herein below:

¶15

S.No.	Particulars of t	he Case
1.	FIR Number	1/2024
2.	Concerned Police Station	Gulabpura
3.	District	Bhilwara
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Sections 392 & 307 of IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act
5.	Offences added, if any	Sections 395 & 216 of IPC and Section 4/25 of Arms Act
6.	Date of passing of impugned order	02.02.2024

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:11964]

[CRLMB-1602/2024]

I have perused the material available on record. Admittedly, neither the petitioner is found involved in the offence of dacoity nor he is accused of making an attempt to kill. He has been arrested in this case for the reason that he gave shelter to the accused of committing offence of loot. Harboring an accused with the knowledge that he committed the offence of loot is an offence, however, in all such cases having knowledge of the act committed by the person seeking shelter is a must. An inference regarding knowledge can only be drawn after the entire evidence would laid in trial. At this stage, he has been arrested and sent to judicial custody. I see no reason to allow his further incarceration. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

¶21

Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes 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 his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶23

69-Samvedana/-

Biram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biram 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

Shanti Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranjeet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ram Singh and Ors. Vs State

Ajab Kumar Vs State

Aneesh Khan Vs State of Rajasthan