Mohammed Ali Khan vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2459 Raj

[2023/RJJD/007582]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2323/2023

Mohammed Ali Khan S/o Haji Abdul Gani, Aged About 75 Years, R/o Ward No. 25, Mohalla Vyapariyan, District Churu. (At Present Lodged In District Jail, Churu)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. KL Thakur Mr. Om Rajpurohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP Mr. Shambhoo Singh, for the complainant

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Order

27/03/2023

The present criminal misc bail application under Section 439

of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner in relation to FIR

No.221/2022 lodged at Police Station Kotwali, District Churu for

the offences under Sections 120B, 148, 302, 341 and 149 of the

IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has not committed the offences alleged against him and he has

been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that

there is no evidence available on record against him for

committing conspiracy and there is no footage of him in the

alleged CCTV camera.

[2023/RJJD/007582] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2323/2023]

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial of the case may

take long time.

Learned counsel submits that the co-accused Mohammed

Rafiq @ Fiku has already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate

Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.2.2023 passed in SB Cr.

Misc. Bail Application No.16266/2022 and the case of the present

petitioner is not distinguishable to the case of the co-accused

Mohammed Raifq.

While arguing that on the allegation of grave and serious

offence and pendency of several criminal case against the accused

cannot be the basis to refuse prayer of bail, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of UP in

Cr. Appeal No.152/2020, decided on 24.1.2020. Learned counsel

thus prayed that the petitioner being 75 years' old person may be

released on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer

made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that if the

page nos.32 and 55 to 59 of the paper book (part of charge-sheet

and the information given under Section 27 of the Evidence Act

and Maps etc) are seen, then it is amply clear that in the house of

the petitioner, the conspiracy was hatched and the present

petitioner is the conspirator for commission of offence as alleged

against him. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the

petitioner and the deceased was also having enmity.

It is submitted that the case of the present petitioner is

distinguishable from the case of co-accused Mohammed Rafiq and

[2023/RJJD/007582] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2323/2023]

since the petitioner is history-sheeter and as many as 16 other

cases are registered against the petitioner, he may not be released

on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and

after perusing the entire material available on record and looking

to the gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioner,

without commenting on merits and demerits of the case, this

Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the

petitioner, at this stage.

The bail application, is therefore, rejected.

However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the

trial of the case.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J 103-CPGoyal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)