Allowed

Nirmal Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC27 Aug 2024CRLMB/516/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur allowed a second bail application. Holding that prosecution eye-witnesses had turned hostile, the court found the case lacked substantial evidence, relieving the applicant on personal bond with sureties despite a blood-stained stick recovered but inconclusive FSL report.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Nirmal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:35358]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 516/2024

¶4

Nirmal Singh S/o Sh. Bhanwar Singh @ Gandhi, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Bera Bhatiyo Ka Aahat Village Manda, Tehsil Marwar Junction, P.S. Sojat Road, Dist. Pali. (Presently Lodged At Dist. Jail, Pali)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Pradeep Shah Mr. Ravi Panwar Mr. B.S.Rathore
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Sharwan Singh Rathore, Public Prosecutor

¶10

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶11

Order

¶12

27/08/2024

¶13

This second application for bail has been filed by the applicant under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) in connection with FIR No.140/2023, registered at Police Station Sojat Road, District Pali for the offences under sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’).

¶14

The first bail application being (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.15983/2023) filed on behalf of the applicant was dismissed as not pressed on 20.12.2023.

¶15

Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the applicant argued that as per the charge-sheet, two persons, namely, Kan Singh and Hem Singh had named the applicant and both these persons said to

[2024:RJ-JD:35358]

[CRLMB-516/2024]

(2 of 3)

have seen the deceased being beaten with lathi and sticks by the applicant have turned hostile, while giving their testimony in the Court.

¶20

Learned counsel also argued that the case of the prosecution was essentially on the basis of testimony of these two persons and when they have turned hostile, no evidence remains against the applicant, for which he can be convicted.

¶21

It was also submitted that all other co-accused persons, namely, Vena Ram and Kundan Singh have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.12.2023 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 15982/2023 and 15983/2023 respectively.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that maybe eye-witnesses have turned hostile, but the blood stained stick was recovered from the applicant and thus, there is every possibility that he will be convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record.

¶24

So far as the prosecution’s case based upon the testimony of the eye-witness is concerned, the same has fallen flat on the ground, as eye witnesses (Kan Singh and Hem Singh) have turned hostile.

¶25

The only incriminating evidence available on record against the applicant is, the recovery of the blood stained stick. On perusal of the FSL report dated 25.08.2023, it is clear that stick ( lakdi ) which is alleged to have been recovered from the applicant

[CRLMB-516/2024]

[2024:RJ-JD:35358]

(3 of 3)

shows presence of the blood but the same is inconclusive in relation to blood group.

¶30

Consequently, the second bail application filed under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. The applicant - Nirmal Singh S/o

¶31

Sh. Bhanwar Singh @ Gandhi arrested in connection with FIR No.140/2023, registered at Police Station Sojat Road, District Pali shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶32

Applicant shall be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶33

Needless to mention that the above observations made by this Court are on the basis of material so far produced before the Court. These are only prima-facie observations and the same shall however, not come in the way of the trial Court to take independent view of the matter, based on ocular and oral evidence, while finally deciding the case.

¶34

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶35

106-akansha/-

Nirmal Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmal Singh 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

Sagar Mal Dak Vs Surendra Jain

Mission Swasthya Sewa Samiti Vs the State of Rajasthan

L.N. Memorial Para Medical Institute Vs the State of Rajasthan

Mohan Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Vikas @ Vikki Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan