This High Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused charged with murder, finding prima facie lack of direct evidence connecting him to the crime and noting the absence of bloodstains on the recovered weapon.
Bail granted with personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each on trial conditions.
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.
(1 of 3) [CRLMB-639/2024]
[2024:RJ-JD:13085]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 639/2024
Vijay Choudhary @ Bihari S/o Jalandhar Choudhary, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Doh, Tehsil Simni Bakhtyapur, P.s. Karniya, Dist. Saharsa (Bihar) At Present Reside At Ward No. 6 Alhani Tehsil And P.s. Malkoa, Dist. Sirsa At Present Nathwana Puliya Ke Niche Nahar Sadul Branch Kasba Sangriya, Dist. Hanumangarh (Raj.). (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Hanumangarh).
----Petitioner
| Versus |
|---|
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
| ----Respondent | |
|---|---|
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. KuldeepSharma |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gauri,PP |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
19/03/2024
This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.199/2021 registered at Police Station Sangriya, District Hanumangarh, for offence under Section 302 of the IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no evidence worth the name available on record of the case to connect the petitioner with the commission of the alleged crime of murder of Mangal Singh. Drawing attention of the court towards the FIR No. 199/2021 dated 16.04.2021, learned counsel submitted that the dead body of the deceased Mangal Singh was
[2024:RJ-JD:13085]
[CRLMB-639/2024]
(2 of 3)
found lying near water canal. Learned counsel submitted that though in the FIR the complainant apprehended involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged crime but there is no evidence available on record to show that the present petitioner had committed the alleged crime. Learned counsel urged that there was no motive of the petitioner to kill the deceased-Mangal Singh.
Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecution, the deceased, seen before his death, was seen in the company of the present petitioner by the one Gurvinder Singh @ Sonu. Drawing attention of the court towards the statements of Gurvinder Singh @ Sonu recorded before the competent criminal court as PW-3, learned counsel submitted that PW-3 during the court statement has clearly stated that he had not seen the petitioner and the deceased fighting or the petitioner killing the deceased. As per the statements of PW-3, on 15.04.2021, he had only seen the petitioner and the deceased talking to each other. Learned counsel submitted that in view of aforesaid statements of PW-3 it cannot be said that the present petitioner had committed the alleged crime.
Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody w.e.f. 16.04.2021 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this court prima facie finds that there is
[2024:RJ-JD:13085]
[CRLMB-639/2024]
(3 of 3)
no direct evidence available on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of the alleged crime. This Court also prima facie finds that the blunt weapon ( Lathi ) has been recovered at the instance of the present petitioner however, the same does not contain any blood stains. Thus, in the opinion of this Court whether or not, the evidence of “last seen” can be treated to be sufficient for holding the present petitioner guilty, would be for the trial court to decide and any comment by this court at this stage may prejudice the trial. However, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances as noted above, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Vijay Choudhary @ Bihari S/o Jalandhar Choudhary, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.199/2021 registered at Police Station Sangriya, District Hanumangarh, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
648-Hanuman/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the petitioner charged under Section 302 IPC in a murder investigation.
Whether lack of direct evidence to connect the petitioner with the crime is a ground for bail.
Whether recovery of a weapons in the petitioner's name without bloodstains affects the 'last seen' phase of investigation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vijay Choudhary @ Bihari
State Of Rajasthan
Kuldeep Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
