(1 of 3) [CRLMB-4274/2021] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4274/2021 Satish Kumar S/o Kirtar Singh, Aged About 34 Years, By Caste Jat, R/o Baseri Chahar Kirawali, Police Station Kagarol, District Agra. Presently, House No. 29 Anumnagar Fajalpur, P.s. Kankarkheda, District Merath (U.p.). (In Judicial Custody At Central Jail, Jodhpur).
----Petitioner Versus State, Through P.p.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagmal Choudhary, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pradeep Choudhary, through Cisco Webex For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA (VACATION JUDGE) Judgment 09/06/2021
1. This application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with CR No.7/2006 Police Station Dangiyawas, District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of IPC.
2. Mr. Choudhary, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the reason for which the petitioner has been roped in is only that the petitioner stayed in Raneja Hotel, a day before the incident. He submits that the main accused Hemlata, Narpat and Bhanwar Singh have been acquitted by Division Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 14.12.2011 passed in DB Cr. Appeal Nos. 122,166 and 95 of 2008 and even (Downloaded on 09/06/2021 at 08:20:03 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4274/2021] the co-accused Javed Khan has been enlarged by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.5.2014 passed in SB Cr. Misc. III Bail Application No.4057/2014 (Javed Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan).
3. Learned Senior Counsel argues that since the story of the prosecution has been found untenable by the Division Bench of this Court and as there is no other allegation or incriminating evidence against the petitioner, it cannot be said that the petitioner's case is different from that of aforesaid co-accused.
4. Mr. Bishnoi, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application, inter alia, contending that the petitioner has been absconding and even on facts of his case, he should not be given benefit of bail.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that the co-accused Hemlata & Ors have already been acquitted by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 14.12.2011 and other co-accused Javed Khan has been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court; and upon perusal of the evidence submitted alongwith the charge-sheet, this Court does not find any evidence, which can distinguish petitioner's case from that of remaining co-accused. In this view of the matter, according to this Court, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. Consequently, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner Satish Kumar S/o Kirtar Singh, arrested in CR No.7/2006 Police Station Dangiyawas, District Jodhpur 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.
(Downloaded on 09/06/2021 at 08:20:03 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-4274/2021]
7. Petitioner shall be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
8. Needless to observe that the above observations made by this Court are on the basis of material so far produced before the Court. They are only prima-facie observation 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.
(DINESH MEHTA), VJ.
2-CPGoyal/-
(Downloaded on 09/06/2021 at 08:20:03 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)