Pintu S/O Shri Munesh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 3304 Raj/2

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
                                11044/2021

Pintu S/o Shri Munesh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Mathvanshi
(Machet) Ps Sadar Dist. Karauli Raj. (At Present In Confined In
Dist. Jail Karauli)
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                  ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Upman, through VC For Complainant(s) : Mr. Harikishan Sharma for Rajneesh Gupta For State : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

29/07/2021

1. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.298/2020 was registered at Police Station Masalpur,

District Karauli for offence under Sections 143, 365 & 302 I.P.C.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the

statement recorded was confessional statement of co-accused and

this cannot be considered as evidence as this statement was made

before the police. It is also contended that as per the post-mortem

report, death occurred within 24 hours prior to examination of the

dead body. The examination took place on 25.12.2020 at 4:30 pm

which means that death occurred after 4:30 pm on 24.12.2020,

whereas, as per the investigation done by the police, the incident

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-11044/2021]

took place in the night of 23.12.2020.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant

have opposed the bail application. It is contended that petitioner

was having illicit relation with the wife of the deceased. She tried

to mislead the police by giving information to her brother-in-law

that some persons have taken the deceased alongwith him and

have thrown the dead body near a bridge It is further contended

that Bolero of petitioner was seized, wherein there were blood

stains.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

State and counsel for the complainant, I am not inclined to

entertain the bail application.

7. This bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /28

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)