Alabachaya @ Bachu Khan vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9766 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6422/2021

Alabachaya @ Bachu Khan S/o Ismail Khan, Aged About 25 Years, Cha Dahni, Shri Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer. At Present Dudi Fanta, P.s. Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer (Rajasthan). (Presently Lodged In District Jail Jaisalmer).

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kunal Bishnoi (through VC) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gauri, PP Mr. Pradeep Choudhary, (through VC)

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA (VACATION JUDGE)

Judgment

09/06/2021

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439

Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in relation to

FIR No.36/2020, Police Station Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer for

offences under Sections 427 & 302/34 of the IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

Learned counsel Shri Bishnoi vehemently and fervently urges

that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. An incident

of accidental death plain and simple has been given colour of

murder for oblique motives. There is stark contradiction regarding

the manner in which the incident took place in the handwritten

(2 of 4) [CRLMB-6422/2021]

report lodged by first informant Khan Mohammad, the father of

the deceased Tayar Khan at the Police Station Mohangarh, District

Jaisalmer on the date of incident i.e., 18.05.2020 and in the

second typed report dated 19.05.2020. Whilst in the handwritten

report, it was alleged that the petitioner and his companions were

pursuing the deceased in their pick-up vehicle and they

intentionally collided with the motorcycle of the deceased from

behind due to which, Tayar Khan was thrown up in the air and he

fell down and thereafter the occupants of the vehicle i.e., Bachchu

Khan and Ismile Khan, got down and brutally assaulted Tayar

Khan by lathies and killed him. When this version was not found

plausible after preliminary investigation, a rectification application

dated 19.05.2020 was filed by Khan Mohammad wherein he

totally changed the manner of incident and alleged that as a

matter of fact, collision was made head on. Shri Bishnoi drew the

Court's attention to the statements of the eyewitnesses namely

Mujjafar Ali, Hazi Khan, Atta Mohd. and Shere Khan who

categorically stated that the incident took place in form of collision

between the Pickup vehicle which was being driven by the present

petitioner and that neither the petitioner nor the co-accused

Ismile Khan were having any weapons nor they did assault the

deceased by weapons. He further points out that no evidence

whatsoever was collected by the IO to fortify the allegation that

there existed prior enmity between the petitioner and the

deceased. On these grounds, Shri Bishnoi craves indulgence of

bail to the petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for

the complainant vehemently and fervently opposed the

(3 of 4) [CRLMB-6422/2021]

submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel. Shri Pradeep

Choudhary pointed out the site inspection plan prepared by the IO

and tried to convince the Court that it is a case of intentional

collision and as such, the petitioner should not be granted bail.

However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact that the

there are significant contradictions in the two versions of the

complainant as set out in the written report dated 18.05.2020 and

the typed error rectification report dated 19.05.2020. In the

written report as well as in the typed report, the first informant

alleged that after the pickup vehicle had been intentionally collided

with the motorcycle, Tayar Khan fell down whereafter both the

accused persons i.e., the petitioner herein and Ismile Khan got

down and assaulted him by their weapons (Lathis and Axes) and

killed him. However, the eyewitnesses referred to supra

categorically disputed this version of the first informant and stated

that none of the accused was armed nor did they assault the

deceased after the collision. Further, the IO did not collect any

evidence whatsoever to fortify the version of the complainant

regarding existence of prior enmity between the petitioner and the

deceased. In this background but without commenting on the

merits of the case, I am of the opinion that there exist valid and

justifiable grounds so as to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that the accused-petitioner Alabachaya @ Bachu Khan S/o Shri

Ismail Khan arrested in connection with the F.I.R. No.36/2020

registered at Police Station Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer shall be

released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of

Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the

(4 of 4) [CRLMB-6422/2021]

satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear

before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called

upon to do so.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),VJ 5-Sudhir Asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)