Allowed

Annu S/O Haricharan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Jan 2024CRLMB/82/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the petitioner facing charges under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 302 IPC and 120B IPC. The order granted bail based on the total circumstances and noting the co-accused was granted bail, without commenting on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each, along with conditions of appearance and no further offences.

Annu S/O Haricharan Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 82/2024

¶3

Annu S/o Haricharan, R/o Kondar, Police Station Sadar Karauli, District Karauli (Raj.). (The Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In District Jail, Karauli).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Singh, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶10

Order

¶11

19/01/2024

¶12

Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶13

F.I.R. No. 131/2022 was registered at Police Station Kudgaon, District Karauli (Raj.) for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341 & 302 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 302 and 120B of IPC.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. He further submits that entire prosecution case is based on the testimony of sole eyewitness, namely-Vijendra who has been examined during the course of trial as PW-1. He submits that Vijendra (sole eye-witness of the case) has not supported the prosecution case and has been

¶15

[CRLMB-82/2024]

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

declared hostile. He submits that complainant has also been examined during the course of trial and he has not stated anything against the petitioner. It is submitted that a video was produced during the course of investigation wherein no role has been assigned to the petitioner. It is further contended that co-accused of this case, namely-Abhishek has been granted benefit of bail by this court and case of the present-petitioner is on similar footing. Petitioner is in custody since 18.07.2023. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time. It is also contended that further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that petitioner was also present at the place of incident. 5. I have considered the contentions.

¶19

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and especially the fact that co-accused of this case has been granted benefit of bail by this court; charge-sheet has been filed as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶20

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Annu S/o Haricharan, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the

¶21

[CRLMB-82/2024]

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶24

The accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail. If breach of this condition is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by

¶25

this Court.

¶26

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶27

ANANDTANWAR/72

Annu S/O Haricharan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annu S/O Haricharan 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

Dhara Singh S/O Shri Shivpal Vs State of Rajasthan

Arjun S/O Ramdayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu Sharma @ Aditya Sharma S/O Shri Dinesh Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramprasad @ Rp S/O Late Lahariram Jogi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Anar Singh S/O Ramesh Chand Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shubham Mehra @ Devendra S/O Shri Surendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan