Vijay Balani S/O Ghanshyamdas @ ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3915 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

 S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 19247/2021

Vijay Balani S/o Ghanshyamdas @ Pappu, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Opposite Govt. Hospital Sunar Gali Gangapur City Dist.
Sawaimadhopur Raj. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Gangapur
City Dist. Sawaimadhopur)
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Harendra Singh.
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP.



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                    Order

18/05/2022

1. The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioner

Vijay Balani S/o Ghanshyamdas @ Pappu under Section 439

Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR

No.89/2021 registered at Police Station Gangapur City,

Sawaimadhopur for the offence(s) under Sections 302 IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false case

has been foisted against the petitioner. He has nothing to do with

the alleged offences and no useful purpose would be served by

keeping him behind the bars. He further submits that there is no

eye witness of the incident and the case of the prosecution is

based upon circumstantial evidence, however, the same is not

conclusive in nature. He submits that the case of the prosecution

is based upon the purported extra judicial confession made before

Manoj Chandwani who happens to be close relative of the

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-19247/2021]

deceased. He further submits that the evidence of extra judicial

confession is very weak in nature and a person makes the same

before whom he trusts and seeks assistance. There was no

occasion for the accused to make confession before a close

relative of the deceased with whom he was having no hope of

assistance. He further submits that recovery of sharp edged

weapon from the instance of the petitioner is nothing but farce

since the handle of the weapon was lying near the dead body.

Charge-sheet has been filed. He further placed reliance upon the

judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of

Rajasthan versus Raja Ram (2003) SCC 180.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application.

4. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the

parties and looking to the possibility that the trial may take long

time to conclude, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge

the petitioner on bail.

5. Accordingly, the 2nd bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner shall be

enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum

of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the

satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before

the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called

upon to do so.

(FARJAND ALI),J

PREETI VALECHA /02

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)