Rajasthan High Court
Arsad S/O Sh. Aasu vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 1 February, 2023
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2023/RJJP/001094]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 13522/2022
Arsad S/o Sh. Aasu, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Gadad
Bass, Police Station Kho, District Bharatpur. (At Present Confined
In Central Jail Alwar)
----Accused-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
----Non-Petitioner
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gurvindra Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment
01/02/2023
The present second bail application has been filed under
Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection
with FIR No.445/2015 registered at Police Station M.I.A. (Udhyog
Nagar) Alwar, District Alwar for the offence(s) under Section(s)
323, 342, 365 & 392 IPC and later on for offence(s) under
Section(s) 323, 342, 365 & 395 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has falsely
been implicated in this case. He submits that neither he was
identified nor, there is recovery of any incriminating material from
him. He submits that although the petitioner is in custody since
12.12.2019 but, not a single prosecution witness has been
examined so far. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner
on bail.
[2023/RJJP/001094] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13522/2022]
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposing the prayer
submitted that FIR was lodged on 19.09.2015; but, the petitioner
could be arrested on 12.12.2019 and hence, nothing could be
recovered from his possession. He submits that co-accused
persons are absconding and hence, trial could not commence.
Learned Public Prosecutor submits that there are 33 other criminal
cases registered against the petitioner and hence, he does not
deserve indulgence of bail.
Heard. Considered.
The first bail application filed by the petitioner after filing of
charge-sheet against him was dismissed by this Court vide order
dated 03.06.2021 which reads as under:
"After arguing at length, learned counsel
for the petitioner wants to withdraw this bail
application.
The bail application is dismissed
accordingly."
The FIR was lodged on 19.09.2015 and the petitioner came
to be arrested on 12.12.2019. The supplementary charge-sheet
filed against the petitioner reflects sufficient evidence to show
involvement of the petitioner in the offences. Trial could not
commence as number of other co-accused persons are
absconding. There are about 33 more criminal cases registered
against the petitioner out of which many are under grave offences
as also under offences of similar nature.
In these circumstances, it is apparent that the petitioner is a
habitual offender and indulges in offences of similar or grave
nature again and again, misusing the liberty of bail granted to him
[2023/RJJP/001094] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13522/2022]
on earlier occasion. In view thereof, this Court is not inclined to
extend the petitioner benefit of bail.
Accordingly, the second bail application is dismissed.
However, looking to length of custody of the petitioner, the
learned trial Court is directed to conduct separate trial for the
petitioner and co-accused persons, who are in custody/bail and
endeavour to complete the same as expeditiously as possible.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Sudha/05
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
