Dismissed

Dharmendra Singh @ Karkalli S/O Hukum Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Mar 2024CRLMB/515/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. against charges under Sections 323, 341, and 307 IPC. The court considered the gravity of the allegations and the serious nature of injuries caused by a sharp-edged object. The trial court was directed to record the victim's statement on priority, after which the petitioner could file a fresh bail applicatio

What the court decided

AI extract

Dharmendra Singh @ Karkalli S/O Hukum Singh Vs State of… — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:11513]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 515/2024

¶4

Dharmendra Singh @ Karkalli S/o Hukum Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Shahpur, Deeg, Police Station Kotwali Deeg, District Deeg Rajasthan. (Presently Confined In Jail District Deeg)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Chandra Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP Mr. Rahul Sinsinwar

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶11

Order

¶12

06/03/2024

¶13

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner in connection with FIR No.393/2023 registered at Police Station Deeg, District Deeg wherein he is charged for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 307 of IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after a delay of two days FIR has been lodged and the petitioner has been falsely implicated. Counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.11.2023 and after investigation chargesheet has been filed, therefore, indulgence of bail be granted to the petitioner.

¶15

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as the counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application and

[2024:RJ-JP:11513]

[CRLMB-515/2024]

(2 of 2)

stated that repeated injuries were caused by the petitioner upon the injured Santosh by sharp edged object and injury no.1 was found to be grievous and dangerous to life. Counsel submits that under these circumstances interference of this court is not warranted and the bail application filed by the petitioner is liable to be rejected.

¶20

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record.

¶21

Looking to the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and looking to the fact the injured has sustained several injuries caused by sharp edged object which is alleged to have been caused by the petitioner, this court is not inclined to accept the bail application of the petitioner.

¶22

Hence, the present bail application stands dismissed.

¶23

However, the trial Court is directed to record the statement of the victim on priority basis preferably as a first witness thereafter, the petitioner would be at liberty to file fresh bail application before the trial Court.

¶24

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶25

Diksha/81

Dharmendra Singh @ Karkalli S/O Hukum Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dharmendra Singh @ Karkalli S/O Hukum Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nawalkishor Meena @ N.K. Meena S/O Shri Sharawanlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Hariram Gurjer S/O Harinarayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Mamta Devi W/O Lt. Shriya Nath @ Sariya Jogi Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharmendra Kumar S/O Shri Bhagirathmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Kumar S/O Rajendra Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashutosh Garg S/O Sh. Krishna Gopal Garg Vs Union of India