Allowed

Rajesh Kumar S/O Hajarilal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Feb 2024CRLMB/203/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the third bail application of the petitioner, noting that the prosecution case relied on circumstantial evidence, the last seen witness was hostile, and key evidence linking the petitioner was absent. The court considered the denial of bail to other co-accused as inconsistent and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Rajesh Kumar S/O Hajarilal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:8523]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 203/2024

¶4

Rajesh Kumar S/o Hajarilal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Dola, Police Station Pidava, District Jhalawar (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhalawar, District Jhalawar).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Rajveer Singh Gurjar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Sanjeev Mahala, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

19/02/2024

¶13

The instant third bail application has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.90/2022 registered at Police Station Pindava, District Jhalawar for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 364 and 302 of IPC.

¶14

The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh bail application after recording the testimony of Investigating Officer. Now, Investigating Officer of this case has been examined during the course of trial as PW-9. Thus, this third bail application has been preferred.

¶15

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that it was alleged that mobile no. 8504078571 mentioned in FIR belongs to the petitioner. According to the

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:8523]

[CRLMB-203/2024]

testimony of the Investigating Officer, no evidence is available on record that suggests that aforementioned mobile number belongs to the petitioner. He submits that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no eye-witness of the incident. He submits that last seen witness of the case has been declared hostile and other co-accused persons namely- Sitaram, Sanjay and Dinesh Kumar have been granted benefit of bail by this court as well as co-ordinate bench of this court. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 16.05.2022 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that bail applications of co-accused persons of this case namely- Lalchand and Bhairulal have been rejected by the coordinate bench of this court.

¶21

I have considered the contentions.

¶22

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that the entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence; last seen witness of the case has been declared hostile and so also considering the fact that from the testimony of the Investigating Officer, it does not appear that mobile no. mentioned in the FIR belongs to the petitioner; co-accused persons of this case namelySitaram, Sanjay and Dinesh Kumar have been granted benefit of bail by this court as well as co-ordinate bench of this court; absence of criminal antecedents as well as looking to the custody

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:8523]

[CRLMB-203/2024]

period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow this 3^rd bail application. 7. This third bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Rajesh Kumar S/o Hajarilal, 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.

¶27

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶28

GAUTAM JAIN /5

Rajesh Kumar S/O Hajarilal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar S/O Hajarilal 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

Noor Mohammad S/O Shahjad Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

State Vs Shri Ram Singh

Shareeph S/O Shri Jumma Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Deeparam S/O Shri Mobaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Arbaz Son of Shri Shabbir Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Kumar S/O Shri Surendra Kumar, Vs State of Rajasthan