Rajasthan High Court
Kapil Kumar S/O Shri Amarchand vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 16 October, 2023
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2023:RJ-JP:29495]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 12078/2023
Kapil Kumar S/o Shri Amarchand, Aged About 23 Years, Resident
Of Village Sumer. Police Station Malakhera, Alwar (Raj.)
(Presently Accused Petitioner Is In Judicial Custody In Jail,
Alwar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Mehla, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
16/10/2023
1. The instant third bail application has been filed under Section
439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the accused-applicant. The accused-
applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No. 448/2022
registered at Police Station Malakhera, District Alwar for the
offence under Section 306 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after the
rejection of second bail application, the statements of two more
witnesses (PW-9 Ghanshyam and PW-10 Bal Kishan) have been
recorded, who have turned hostile and are not supporting the case
of the prosecution. Learned counsel for the applicant further
submits that there are material improvements in the statements
of other witnesses, and therefore their testimony should not be
relied upon. Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied on
Apex Court judgments of Sanju vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
[2023:RJ-JP:29495] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12078/2023]
reported in AIR 2002 SC 1998, Kanchan Sharma vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2021/INSC/496)
reported in AIR 2021 SC 4313, and V.P. Singh and Ors. vs.
The State of Punjab and Ors. (Neutral Citation:
2023/INSC/1326) and judgment of Allahabad High Court in
Anand Singh and Ors. vs. State of U.P. and Ors (Application
U/S 482 No. 19450 of 2010; decided on 10.03.2021)
reported in 2021 (3) ALJ 379.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the present bail application.
4. Heard and considered.
5. The first bail application was rejected on merits vide order
dated 10.10.2022 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application
No. 12071/2022. The second bail application was rejected on
merits vide order dated 12.07.2023 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous
Bail Application No. 6115/2023 and the operative portion of the
said order is reproduced as under:
"7. Considering the arguments advanced by both
the sides; considering the statements of father (PW-
1) and mother of the deceased; considering that the
PMR reflects injuries/abrasions on the body of the
victim; considering the gravity of the offence and
looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the
case and material on record but without commenting
on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not
inclined to allow the second bail application of the
accused-applicant, especially since there is no
material change in circumstances since rejection of
first bail application."
6. Considering the arguments advanced by both the sides,
considering the gravity of offence, considering that there has been
no change in statements of the mother and father of deceased;
[2023:RJ-JP:29495] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12078/2023]
that the PMR which reflects injuries/abrasion on the body of the
victim is still incontrovertible, and looking to the overall facts and
circumstances of the case and material on record but without
commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not
inclined to allow the present bail application.
7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands dismissed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
ANIL SHARMA /387
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
