High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 11 RAJ CK 0052

Jagdish S/o Amar Singh @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 27 November 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.K. Lohra, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Misc. Bail No. 10892 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 477 words

Accused-petitioner has laid this second bail application while facing trial for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 450, 307 read with Section

149 IPC and 3/27 of the Arms Act before Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Rajgarh, District Churu in Sessions Case No.19/2018. The case is founded on

C.R. Case No.77/2014 of Police Station Sidhmukh (Churu).

First bail application on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed on 30th of May, 2018.

Arguing on second bail application, it is submitted by learned Senior counsel that the incident relates back to 27th of May, 2014 and police after

protracted investigation proposed negative final report in the matter in the year 2017 but, later on, investigation was handed over to CID CB and

further probing the matter, CID CB has submitted charge-sheet in the matter sufficiently demonstrates that there are serious pitfalls in the prosecution

case. It is also argued by learned Senior Counsel that some of the co-accused namely Surendra Kumar and Vinod Kumar have been enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel further submits that although as per prosecution, a twelve bore gun is recovered from the petitioner but the said recovery was four

years posterior to the date of incident which creates serious doubts about its nexus with the alleged offence. It is also submitted by learned Senior

Counsel that since charge-sheet has been filed after a lapse of four years, completion of trial in near future is not offing is yet another factor for

considering bail plea of the petitioner favourably.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. It is argued by learned Public Prosecutor that case of the petitioner is

distinguishable from other co-accused, Surendra Kumar and Vinod Kumar inasmuch as precisely allegation is against the petitioner that he has used

firearms at the time of commission of offence. It is also argued by Mr. Arjun Singh that there is recovery of firearms from the petitioner.

I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar and perused the materials available on record.

Taking into account the chequered history and the prolong investigation in the matter with different conclusions by the investigating agencies from time

to time and the recovery of alleged weapon of offence after a lapse of four years, while refraining to make any comment on merits of the case, I feel

persuaded to accept the second bail application.

Consequently, this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner, Jagdish S/o Amar Singh,

arrested in connection with FIR No.77/2014, registered at Police Station Sidhmukh, District Churu, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a

personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that

Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.