Rajasthan High Court
Mahaveer S/O Sh. Brahmanand vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 20 October, 2023
Bench: Ganesh Ram Meena
[2023:RJ-JP:30941]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
8587/2023
Mahaveer S/o Sh. Brahmanand, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Village Doomeda, Police Station Udyog Nagar, Alwar. (At Present
Confined In Central Jail Alwar)
----Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asgar Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yashwant Kankhadia, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Judgment / Order
20/10/2023
1. This second bail application has been filed by the petitioner
under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
2. F.I.R. No.490/2022 was registered at Police Station Udhyog
Nagar, Alwar for the offence under Section 498-A, 406 & 304-B of
IPC.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that after rejection of the
first bail application on 23.05.2023, seven prosecution witnesses
have been examined before the trial Court. Prosecution Witnesses
PW-7- Nagendra s/o Harinand & PW-10-Ghamsi s/o Shri
ramjeevan who are independent witnesses, have not supported
the prosecution story as a whole and the prosecution witnesses
PW-8-Natwar Singh S/o Shri Devnarayan & PW-9- narendra Kumar
S/o Shri Kalwa Singh who are also independent witnesses, have
[2023:RJ-JP:30941] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8587/2023]
been declared hostile. Counsel further submits that the
prosecution witnesses PW-11- Satish Chand, brother of the
deceased, in his cross examination has stated that the deceased
was given treatment being under the influence of negative energy,
which has also been stated by the other independent prosecution
witnesses. Counsel also submits that the petitioner is behind the
bars since 09.09.2022 and because of the arrest of the petitioner
in the present case, his two kids who are residing with his father
are facing great problem therefore, the petitioner may be released
on bail. Trial of the case is likely to take considerable time.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
second bail application and submits that several witnesses have
supported the prosecution story in regard to demand of dowry and
the death of the deceased is unnatural and therefore, looking to
the gravity of offence, bail application of the petitioner deserves to
be dismissed.
5. Considered the submissions put forth by counsel for the
petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the
statements of the prosecution witnesses placed on record.
6. Out of fourteen witnesses examined so far, three
independent witnesses have already been declared hostile and
also the other independent witnesses have not supported the
prosecution story as a whole and in view of the statements of the
prosecution witnesses, it cannot be said that the deceased was not
under the influence of negative energy.
7. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances
[2023:RJ-JP:30941] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8587/2023]
of the case but without making any opinion on the merits and
demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to
enlarge the petitioner on bail.
8. This second bail application is, accordingly, allowed and it is
directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided
he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the
satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall
appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be
transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when
called upon to do so.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J
ARTI SHARMA /2
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
