Single Judge Bench granted bail to the petitioner arrested in a murder case. The Court reasoned that allegations were weak and he should not be kept in custody indefinitely without active role evidence in the murder.
Released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JD:9257]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2036/2024
Yashpal S/o Kanaiyalal Ji, Aged About 25 Years, R/o 32 D-Block Govardhan Vilas, Ps Savina, Dist Udaipur, Raj. (Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. Arun Dadhich |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Anuj Sahlot | ||
| Mr. RS Rathore for Mr. KuldeepPurohit |
||
| For Respondent(s) | : | Mr. Arun Kumar, PP Mr. Avin Chhangani for the complainant |
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
22/02/2024
[2024:RJ-JD:9257]
[CRLMB-2036/2024]
(2 of 4)
allegation against the present applicant is also of recce’ and prayed that applicant be enlarged on bail.
“2. Mr. Mridul Jain, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been enroped on the allegations of conspiracy.
3. Learned counsel took the Court through the conclusion of the charge-sheet, particularly para No.11 thereof and highlighted that the only allegation against the present applicant is that he took the principal accused to Madhya Pradesh for purchase of a pistol and thereafter carried out recce of the deceased.
4. While maintaining that the allegations are baseless, learned counsel argued that even if the same are accepted to be correct then in absence of applicant’s active role in commission of murder, the applicant, who is in judicial custody since 18.04.2023, cannot be kept behind bars till indefinite period.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. Avin Chhangani, learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application by contending that the applicant is a member of the group of criminal tendency, which is indulged in heinous crime.
6. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available on record.
(3 of 4)
[2024:RJ-JD:9257]
[CRLMB-2036/2024]
7. Admittedly, the ground for which the applicant has been inculpated is, the statement under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and there is no other linking evidence in the form of call details or the call location.
8. In the opinion of this Court, even if it is assumed that the present applicant had taken the principal accused in his car to Madhya Pradesh for purchase of pistol, then also he can be accused under the provisions of Arms Act, 1959 read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and not for the offence of murder per-se, unless there is cogent evidence indicating his involvement in such offence.
9. So far as allegation of recce is concerned, this Court is unable to comprehend as to when the address of the deceased was known to the principal accused and when the deceased was murdered at no place other than his shop, how the allegation of recce can hold ground!
10. This Court therefore, deems it just and proper to grant bail to the accused-applicant under section 439 Cr.P.C.”
(4 of 4)
[2024:RJ-JD:9257]
[CRLMB-2036/2024]
(DINESH MEHTA),J
180-akansha/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with offences under Sections 302, 120-B, 201, 115 IPC and Arms Act.
Whether the allegations of conspiracy and recce against the applicant warrant his continued detention in custody.
Whether the applicant is a member of a criminal tendency requiring denial of bail regardless of his specific role.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bharat Singh Vs. State of RajasthanFollowed¶33
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.9224/2023 : Bharat Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Yashpal S/o Kanaiyalal Ji
State Of Rajasthan
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
