Allowed

Rahul @ Rajesh S/O Suresh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2024CRLMB/355/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for an accused facing charges of attempted murder and armed robbery. The court granted bail, relying on the injured's statement attributing firearm injuries to co-accused and recovery from them, while the weapon was not recovered from the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The accused-petitioner shall be enlarged on bail upon furnishing 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.

Rahul @ Rajesh S/O Suresh Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:5667]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 355/2024

¶4

Rahul @ Rajesh S/o Suresh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Fatiyabad, Police Station Kotkasim, District Khairthal Tijara (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Kishangarhbas District Alwar)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.Vikash KumarJakhar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.NS Gurjar, Public Prosecutor
	Mr.AjayPratapSingh Bhadauria

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

02/02/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the accused-petitioner – Rahul @ Rajesh. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.383/2023 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Khairthal – Tijara for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 307 & 379 IPC as well as under Sections 3/25 & 5/27 of Arms Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that as per the statement of injured – Deepak Kumar, fire arm injuries were caused by other co-accused Rakesh and Praveen. There is no version of injured that the present accused-petitioner – Rahul @ Rajesh caused any fire arm injuries to the injured – Deepak Kumar. Learned counsel submits that the accused-petitioner has been involved in the case merely on basis of the statement of

[2024:RJ-JP:5667]

[CRLMB-355/2024]

(2 of 3)

injured that at the time of incident, he was present at the place of occurrence.

¶19

Learned counsel also submits that no fire arm recovery was effected from the accused-petitioner, thus he may be enlarged on bail, as he is in judicial custody since 16^th September, 2023 and trial of the case may take considerable time.

¶20

Per contra, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent (complainant) opposes the bail application and submits that the accused-petitioner called the injured at bus-stand and thereafter, took him to the house of Rakesh. He submits that the accused, in conspiracy with the other co-accused namely Rakesh and Praveen, attempted to kill the injured – Deepak Kumar and nine fire arm injuries were caused to injured – Deepak Kumar. He also submits that when the injured tried to escape from the place of occurrence, the other co-accused and the present accused-petitioner, took him into the vehicle and near Harsoli Road, they again attempted to fire on the injured but the injured was able to run away from there. He further submits that due to gunshot injuries, the injured – Deepak Kumar sustained seven fire arm injuries. Thus, looking to the gravity of offence, the bail application of the accusedpetitioner may be dismissed.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor also opposes the bail application. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that in the statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the injured – Deepak Kumar has categorically stated that fire arm injuries were caused by other coaccused namely Rakesh and Praveen and recovery of fire arm was also effected from the other co-accused namely Rakesh and

¶22

[2024:RJ-JP:5667]

¶23

[CRLMB-355/2024]

¶24

Praveen, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accusedpetitioner on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner – Rahul @ Rajesh S/o Shri Suresh, in connection with FIR No.383/2023 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Khairthal – Tijara 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 and as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶27

Preeti Asopa /29

Rahul @ Rajesh S/O Suresh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul @ Rajesh S/O Suresh 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

Khalil S/O Zafar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Raees @ Raees Khan S/O Nuruddin, Vs State of Rajasthan

Guddi D/O Ramnarayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Yogendra Jaga @ Jogendra S/O Shri Shyamsundar Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu Nagar S/O Shankarlal Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S Mentor India Ltd. Vs Krishan Avtar Sharma S/O Shri Mohanlal Sharma