Deepak S/O Ramesh Chand vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3351 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No.
                              11703/2021

Deepak S/o Ramesh Chand, R/o Jhalara Ps Uniara Dist. Tonk Raj.
(Petitioner Is In J.c. At Dist. Jail Bundi)
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain For State : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

27/04/2022

1. Petitioner has filed this third bail application under Section

439 Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.47/2020 was registered at Police Station Karwar,

District Bundi (Raj.) for offence under Sections 323 & 307 I.P.C.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that a case was

registered on the basis of parchabayan. In the parchabayan,

deceased had mentioned the name of Gulab Karigar and his

brother Prahlad Gurjar. It is also contended that both PW-3

Prahlad Gurjar and PW-4 Gulab Chand have turned hostile. It is

further contended that police has not even mentioned the name of

Kanha Ram, ASI who has recorded the parchabayan, in the list of

witnesses.

4.    Learned   Public   Prosecutor         has     opposed     the   third   bail



                                                                        (2 of 2)                     [CRLMB-11703/2021]

application. It is contended that parchabayan, on the basis of

which F.I.R. was lodged cannot be disbelieved at this stage.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. The veracity of the parchabayan cannot be considered at this

stage more particularly, when there is specific allegation against

the petitioner and on the place of occurrence, blood-stained soil

was recovered, as it is evident from the statement of PW-1.

Merely because Kanha Ram ASI who has recorded parchabayan is

not there in the list of witnesses, cannot be made a ground for

enlarging the accused on bail, as the Court is competent to

summon Kanha Ram who has recorded parchabayan even at later

stage and even when his name is not mentioned in the list of

witnesses, Kanha Ram appears to be material witness and F.I.R.

was lodged on the basis of statement on the parchabayan

recorded by Kanha Ram. Hence, this Court is not inclined to

enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. This third bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /11

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)