Allowed

Kalu Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Jan 2024CRLMB/189/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is an order on a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC by nine accused-petitioners. The High Court dismissed the Public Prosecutor's opposition, held that at a pre-conviction stage bail is the rule, and allowed the application by granting bail in sum of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each of Rs. 25,000.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail to all accused-petitioners on condition of furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:2326]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 189/2024

¶4

Kalu Ram S/o Shri Jagga Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Khkat, Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Sub-Jail Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶5

Hardeo Singh Alias Hardeva S/o Shri Jagga Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Khat Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Sub-Jail Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶6

Bhajan Lal S/o Nshri Hardeo Singh Alias Hardeva, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Khat Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Sub-Jail Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶7

Daleep Ram S/o Shri Jagga Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Khat Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Sub-Jail Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶8

Doola Ram S/o Purna Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Umewala, P.s. Goluwala, Dist. Hanumangarh, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Sub-Jail Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶9

Singar Singh S/o Shri Buta Singh, Aged About 75 Years, R/o Gadar Khera, At Present Khat Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Sub-Jail Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶10

Chhindra Kaur Alias Chhindrapal Kaur W/o Shri Kalu Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Khat Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Central Jail Sriganganagar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶11

Paramjeet Kaur W/o Shri Hardeo Singh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Khat Sajwar, P.s. Sadulshahar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Central Jail Sriganganagar, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶12

Jagindra Kaur Alias Charanjeet Alias Seeto W/o Shri Ramlal, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Ward No. 6, Hadamabad, P.s. Lalgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar, Rajasthan. (Lodged At Central Jail Sriganganagar, Dist.

¶13

(2 of 4) [CRLMB-189/2024]

¶14

[2024:RJ-JD:2326]

¶15

Sriganganagar, Rajasthan).

¶16

----Petitioners

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶19

----Respondent

¶20

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Chaitanya Gahlot
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Vikram Sharma,PP

¶21

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶22

Order

¶23

16/01/2024

¶24

The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioners. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

¶25

S.No.	Particulars of	the Case
1.	FIR Number	193/2023
2.	Concerned Police Station	Rajiyasar
3.	District	Sri Ganganagar
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Sections 447, 323, 341 and 143 of the IPC
5.	Offences added, if any	Sections 308, 324, 325, 147,148,149 of the IPC
6.	Date of passing of impugned order	18.12.2023

¶26

It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioners that no case for the alleged offences is made out against them and their incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-

[2024:RJ-JD:2326]

[CRLMB-189/2024]

(3 of 4)

petitioner and they have been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

¶31

Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

¶32

Have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record. There is a cross case of the same incident in which both the parties have suffered injuries who were the aggressors cannot be ascertained at this stage. Whether the injuries and the circumstances of the case would bring the matter within the ambit of Section 308 of the IPC or not would be a point to be adjudicated by the trial Court after full-fledged evidence is brought on record. At this stage, there is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude and there are no compelling circumstances to allow further incarceration of the petitioners. Thus, in light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioners in the present matter.

¶33

At a pre-conviction stage; bail is a rule and denial from the same should be an exception. The purpose behind keeping an accused behind the bars during trial would be to secure their presence on the day of conviction and that they may receive the sentence as would be awarded to them. Otherwise, it is the rule of Crimnal Jurisprudence that they shall be presumed innocent until the guilt is proved.

¶34

(4 of 4) [CRLMB-189/2024]

¶35

[2024:RJ-JD:2326]

¶36

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

¶37

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶38

17-Mamta/-

Kalu Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalu Ram 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

Teja Ram Vs Union of India

Ganesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Rohitash Vs State of Rajasthan

Prabhu Dayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Noshad Alam Vs Smt. Afsana Bano

Bher Singh Vs State of Rajasthan