Ashok Dudi vs State Of Rajasthan

Vijay Bishnoi, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record.

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.155/2018 of Police Station Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302 and 302/149 IPC. He has preferred this fourth bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that as per the charge-sheet filed by the police, the allegation levelled against the petitioner is to the effect that he inflicted fatal blow on the head of the deceased by the iron rod. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that none of the prosecution witnesses, who are produced as eye witness by the prosecution, has leveled allegation that it is the petitioner who inflicted fatal blow on the head of the deceased by iron rod. It is further submitted that the iron rod recovered at the instance of the petitioner was sent for forensic examination, however, in the FSL report, it is clearly mentioned that the blood stains found on the said iron rod are inconclusive. It is also submitted that the doctor, who had conducted the postmortem of the deceased, has also specifically stated in his court statements that the injuries on the head of the deceased can be caused by stone but has nowhere stated that the fatal injury found on the head of the deceased was caused by iron rod. It is also submitted that the petitioner is in custody since last around four years and trial against him has not been concluded till date. It is further submitted that co-accused have already been enlarged on bail, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that enough evidence is available on record to suggest that the petitioner inflicted fatal blow on the head of the deceased by the iron rod. It is further submitted that as per the postmortem report, the cause of death of the deceased is the injuries on head. It is also submitted that till so far the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner.

Accordingly, this criminal misc. fourth bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.