Kamlesh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 11364 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9402/2021

Kamlesh S/o Bhagwan Lal, Aged About 36 Years, Teliwara Bedla, P.s. Sukher, Dist. Udaipur (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Udaipur).

                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                  ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr Prakash Lamba
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr Sudhir Tak, Public Prosecutor
                                 Mr Naresh Khatri on behalf of Mr O.P.
                                 Godara for complainant

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Judgment / Order

23/07/2021

This bail application has been filed by the petitioner under

Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.87/2021 registered

at Police Station, Sukher, District Udaipur for offence under

Sections 307, 34 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned

Public Prosecutor with learned counsel appearing for the

complainant and perused the entire material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the

statement taken by Police initially the injured does not mention

name of the petitioner and subsequently, the injured has

mentioned name of the petitioner in his statement made under

Sec.161 CrPC. Learned counsel further submits that there is

already a criminal case pending against the complainant, lodged

by the petitioner for offence under Section 307 IPC and other

offences of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel submits that if

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-9402/2021]

the petitioner would have had fired the gun-shot, the complainant

would have named him as they are cousin brothers and the

complainant knows the petitioner; however, he has improved his

statement subsequently.

Learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that

the statement of the complainant has been recorded only

subsequently when he was in fit condition and initial statement

was recorded by Police, can not be relied on for giving benefit to

the petitioner. There are other eye-witnesses who also mentioned

name of the petitioner of having used the fire-arm.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also additionally raised

argument with regard to pistol recovered and submits that the

same has been only got verified by armourer instead of sending it

for forensic examination.

I have considered the submissions and perused the charge-

sheet papers and the statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC.

As regard submissions of the learned counsel relating to

testing of the weapon, it would not be appropriate to make any

comment at this stage and it is left open for the petitioner to take

up the argument during trial.

However, at this stage, taking into consideration the nature

of allegations and that the petitioner alleged to have used fire-

arm, which caused gun-shot injury on the complainant, I am not

inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

The bail application is dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

52-MMA/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)