Hariram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:22785) on 12 May, 2025

0
11

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Hariram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:22785) on 12 May, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:22785]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
    S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2350/2025

Krishna Kumar S/o Balwant, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 16-17
KNN, Tehsil Nohar, District - Hanumanagarh.
(Presently Lodged In Sub Jail Nohar, District - Hanumanagarh)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
                                                                 ----Respondent
                              Connected With
   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13415/2024
Hariram S/o Laalchand, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 16-17 KNN,
Tehsil Nohar, District - Hanumangarh.
(Lodged In District Jail Hanumangarh)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Rajendra Choudhary
For Respondent(s)         :     Ms. Sonu Manawat, Public Prosecutor



    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI

Order

12/05/2025

These application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439

Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested

in connection with F.I.R. No.61/2023, registered at Police Station

Fefana, District – Hanumangarh for offences under Sections 148,

302, 341, 342, 323 & 149 of the IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

(Downloaded on 12/05/2025 at 09:41:04 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:22785] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-2350/2025]

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the

case of the prosecution, the complainant Ramdas has given a

written report to the effect that at about 11:00 am he received a

phone call from Rajani, the wife of his brother calling him to

rescue them as accused Hansraj and other co-accused persons

have snatched away their motorcycle and Sughash was assaulted

by them with the Lathis at the house of accused Hansraj. When

he reached at the spot he saw that Kalu, Hansraj, Kanhiram,

Krishna, Raju, Kair Singh, Hari Singh, Hemraj, Vikram, Nandu and

two three women all were beating to his brother Subhash with

lathis. Subhash received serious injuries. Subhash succumbed to

the injuries. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that

accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present

case. Accused-petitioners have not beaten to deceased Subhash.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the co-

accused Vidhya Devi, Vinod Kumar and Rakesh have been

enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders

dated 06.10.2023, 18.04.2024 and 19.10.2024, passed in S.B.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9560/2023, 4461/2024 and

6027/2024 respectively. He submitted that the case of the present

petitioner is not distinguishable than that of the aforesaid co-

accused persons who have been enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that

PW-2 – Gita Devi, PW-6 – Man Singh, PW-7 – Narendra and PW-8

– Govindram did not support the case of the prosecution and they

have been declared hostile.

(Downloaded on 12/05/2025 at 09:41:04 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:22785] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-2350/2025]

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the

accused-petitioners are in judicial custody since long and the trial

of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the accused-

petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed

the bail application and submitted that accused-petitioners have

committed a heinous crime of murder of Subhash, the brother of

the complainant. The complainant Ramdas has also saw the

incident of beating Subhash by the accused persons in the house

of accused Hansraj. Thus, the accused Krishna Kumar has an

active role in commission of murder of Subhash. The case of the

co-accused persons Vidhya Devi, Vinod Kumar and Rakesh is on

different footing. Hence, they have been enlarged on bail.

Accused Krishna Kumar along with co-accused persons Kalu,

Hansraj, Kanhiram, Raju, Kair Singh, Hari Singh, Hemraj, Vikram,

Nandu and two three women all have assaulted Subhash with

lathis mercilessly beaten him. Subhash received grievous injuries.

He succumbed to the injuries. PW-1 Ramdas, PW-2 Kaluram, PW-3

– Mukesh, PW-4 – Rajani and PW-9 – Jaswant have been

examined before the trial Court and they have supported the case

of the prosecution and submitted that they saw accused persons

beating to Subhash.

Therefore, he prayed that looking to the gravity of the

offence, benefit of bail may not be extended to the petitioners.

At the instance of accused-petitioner Krishna Kumar, a

Danda(Lathi) has been recovered. Accused Krishna Kumar in his

disclosure statement has stated that he along with other co-

(Downloaded on 12/05/2025 at 09:41:04 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:22785] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-2350/2025]

accused has assaulted Subhash. PW-1 – Ramdas (complainant)

and PW-5 Rajani who are the eye witnesses, in their statements

recorded before the Court have stated the role of the accused

persons along with other accused persons in committing murder of

Subhash. Other eye-witnesses are yet to be examined.

Though, PW-2 Gita Devi, PW-6 – Man Singh, PW-7 –

Narendra and PW-8 – Govindram have turned hostile, PW-1

Ramdas, PW-2 Kaluram, PW-3 – Mukesh, PW-4 – Rajani and PW-9

– Jaswant have supported the case of the prosecution and

submitted that they saw accused persons beating to Subhash and

due to the beatings Subhash died.

This Court finds that at this stage, when the Investigating

Officer and other relevant prosecution witnesses are yet to be

examined, it cannot be said that the accused persons have not

committed any offence when the eye witnesses Ramdas(PW-1)

and Rajani(PW-4) have stood firm in their examination before the

Trial Court. The involvement of the accused in the commission of

offence can be ascertained only after recording of the statements

of the witnesses. No comment can be made on the

merits/demerits of the case at this stage.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,

this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the accused-petitioners.

The bail applications are, therefore, rejected at this stage.

(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J
41-Ramesh Goyal, P.S./-

(Downloaded on 12/05/2025 at 09:41:04 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here