Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sonu @ Praveen vs State (2023/Rjjd/006328) on 8 March, 2023
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
[2023/RJJD/006328]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 9254/2022
Sonu @ Praveen S/o Sh. Maniram, Aged About 36 Years, 17 K.d.,
Teh. Rawla, Dist. Sriganganagar (Raj.). (Presently Lodged At Sub
Jail Anoopgarh).
----Petitioner
Versus
State, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mrs. Gita, wife of petitioner, present
in person
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
08/03/2023
Heard and perused the material available on record.
The petitioner(s) has/have been arrested in FIR
No.170/2020 of Police Station Rawla, District Sri Ganganagar
for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 307, 323, 341,
324, 326 and 325 IPC. He/she/they has/have preferred
this/these second bail application(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed
by this Court on 15.1.2021 as not pressed while giving him
liberty to file a fresh bail application before the trial court
after recording of the statement of injured Jitendra Kumar
[2023/RJJD/006328] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-9254/2022]
and other prosecution witnesses namely Sitaram, Krishnalal
and Ravi.
It is noticed that charges were framed against the
petitioner on 9.3.2021 and thereafter regularly the so-called
proseuction witnesses have been summoned by the trial court
from time to time. Despite issuance of bailable warrants
against injured Jitendra Kumar and other prosecution
witnesses namely Sitaram, Ravi and Krishnalal and despite
clear instructions given to counsel for the complainant, the
above-named witnesses did not appear before the trial court
for recording their evidence, however, ultimately statement of
Sitaram (PW-1) was recorded before the trial court on
29.10.2021, wherein he has not supported the prosecution
story and turned hostile. Thereafter, statement of Krishna Lal
(PW-2) was recorded before the trial court on 9.9.2022,
wherein he has stated that when he along with Sitaram went
towards the waterworks in search of injured Jitendra Kumar,
he saw petitioner standing beside the injured holding a brick
in his hand. He has specifically stated that he has not seen
the petitioner inflicting injury to Jitendra Kumar. In his cross-
examination, Krishna Lal (PW-2) has also admitted that he
was in a drunken condition on the day of incident when he
reached the waterworks.
It is reported in the order-sheets of the trial court as
also on the reports of the process-server made on the
[2023/RJJD/006328] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-9254/2022]
summons issued to the prosecution witnesses Jitendra Kumar
and Ravi that both of them are deliberately not receiving the
summons issued to them and when injured Jitendra Kumar
was informed on telephone about the summons, he has
stated that he is not going to depose before the trial court
because after his deposition, the petitioner may be enlarged
on bail.
In the factual report submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor, it is clearly mentioned that injured Jitendra Kumar
is deliberately not appearing before the trial court for giving
his evidence despite receipt of summons and bailable
warrants. In respect of prosecution witness Ravi, it is
mentioned in the factual report that at present he is in jail in
relation to a case under the NDPS Act and in another case for
the offence under Section 454 and 380 IPC, therefore, his
evidence could not be recorded before the trial court.
Taking into consideration the statement of Sitaram
(PW-1) and Krishna Lal (PW-2); keeping in view the fact that
injured Jitendra Kumar is deliberately not appearing before
the trial court for giving his evidence and keeping in view the
custody period of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to allow
this second bail application.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the
bail application.
[2023/RJJD/006328] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-9254/2022]
Having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail
to the petitioner(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this/these second bail application(s) filed
under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is/are allowed and it is directed that
petitioner(s) - Sonu @ Praveen S/o Sh. Maniram shall be
released on bail in connection with FIR No.170/2020 of Police
Station Rawla, District Sri Ganganagar provided he/she/they
execute(s) a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with
two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the
satisfaction of learned trial court for his/her/their appearance
before that court on each and every date of hearing and
whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
The factual report dated 8.3.2023 is taken on record.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
18-msrathore/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
