HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10151/2021
Ashok @ Mahesh S/o Shri Phoolchand, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Khariyo Ki Dhani Tan Todi PS Manoharpur Distt. Jaipur Raj.
(Presently Confined At Central Jail Jaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hora with
Mr. T.C. Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Mahala, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order 18/08/2021 The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 429/2020 registered at Police Station Chomu, District Jaipur (West) for the offence under Section 379 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that stolen vehicle was already recovered before the petitioner came to be arrested in the present case. He submitted that he has falsely been implicated in this case merely on account of his arrest in another case of similar nature. With regard to his criminal antecedents, learned counsel for the petitioner, referring the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court of India in case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.: (2020) 11 SCC 648, submitted that criminal record of an accused cannot be sole (Downloaded on 18/08/2021 at 10:08:15 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10151/2021] basis for rejection of his bail application. He, therefore, prayed for benefit of bail for the petitioner.
In pursuance of direction of this Court, learned Public Prosecutor submitted report dated 15.08.2021 furnished by SHO, Police Station Chomu, District Jaipur (West) containing criminal record of the petitioner. The same is taken on record. The criminal record of the petitioner reveals registration of 29 FIRs including the present one against him out of which barring few, mostly are of similar nature.
Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
Statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Lal Ram, Kailash Piploda and Ramswaroop recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., recorded prior to seizure of the vehicle, reveal that the petitioner was involved in the offence of stealing vehicle in question. True that mere criminal record of an accused cannot be sole basis for rejection of his bail application; but, it is a relevant criteria while considering the bail application of an accused. From the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, it is apparent that misusing his liberty of bail granted on earlier occasion, he is indulging in similar nature of offence again and again. A co- ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Vijay Kumar Meena Vs. State-2008 (4) RLW 3041, held as under:
"Although pendency of a criminal case as such may not always be a bar for grant of bail, but if it is shown that in spite of indulgence repeatedly shown by the Court, an accused has been continuously misusing such liberty and involving himself time and again in similar and other nature of offences, this may by itself be a reason for refusal of bail. And that can be done if the Court on the basis of material on record is satisfied that the accused has been repeatedly involving himself (Downloaded on 18/08/2021 at 10:08:15 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10151/2021] in so large number of cases arid at such regular intervals, that he can be safely treated as a habitual offender. Grant of bail no doubt is an issue which concerns the liberty of a citizen. But at the same time, if an accused is shown to frequently and habitually indulge himself in commission of crimes one after the other and becomes a menace to the society, that liberty is required to be balanced against the larger interest of the society. Apart from merits of the case, when it is shown that he has been committing offences with impunity in such a manner that letting him free would again expose the society to the offences that such habitual offender might again commit, the bail application of such an accused can be refused on consideration of his antecedents alone."
In view of the material contained in the case diary, the nature and gravity of allegation against the petitioner and his criminal record and the fact that petitioner is misusing his liberty of bail granted on earlier occasion; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J MADAN/29 (Downloaded on 18/08/2021 at 10:08:15 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)