Sita Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 January, 2025

0
55

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Sita Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 January, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:53177]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13210/2024
Sita Ram S/o Govind Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
Jankidaswala, Ps Suratgarh, Sadar, Dist. Sriganganagar, At
Present R/o Nanihal Chak-5, Dld, Delana, Chhota, Ps
Loonkaransar, Dist. Bikaner. (Lodged In Central Jail Bikaner.)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State of Rajasthan, through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. H.S. Kharlia, Sr. Adv.
                                assisted by Mr. Rajendra Kachhwaha
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP


         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order
07/01/2025
This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483

BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.70/2022 registered at Police Station

Kalu, District Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 341, 364,

302, 201 and 120-B of IPC.

As per the prosecution, on 04.08.2022, at about 7:00 pm,

the deceased Omprakash left the house on his motorbike and

went towards his fields. When he reached at a distance of about

three kilometers from his village, a white coloured swift car

bearing registration No.GJ36-B-2178 came around and four

persons abducted him. The entire incident was witnessed by one

Babulal S/o Sanwat Ram. Later on, the dead body of the deceased

Omprakash was recovered from the road near Gogamedi on

05.08.2022 at 6:00 am.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been

implicated in the present case solely on the basis of circumstantial

(Downloaded on 07/01/2025 at 09:35:20 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:53177] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-13210/2024]

evidence as available on record in form of tower locations and call

details of the petitioner as well as the co-accused and disclosure

statements made by them during their police custody. Learned

counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been

falsely implicated in the present case and he has not even been

named in the FIR. Learned counsel vehemently contended that as

per the prosecution, one blunt weapon (danda), mobile phone and

clothes allegedly worn by him at the time of commission of the

alleged crime have been recovered at the instance of the

petitioner in pursuance of the informations furnished by him under

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Drawing attention of the

Court towards the FSL report, learned counsel submitted that

though the blood stains found on the blunt weapon (danda) as

well as the clothes allegedly recovered at his instance are reported

to be of human origin but the blood grouping of the same did not

match with that of the deceased. Thus, the same has remained

inconclusive.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further drew attention of

the Court towards the statements of the sole eye witness of the

incident namely Babulal S/o Sanwar Ram (PW-01) to contend that

the aforesaid witness during his Court statements categorically

denied the factum of having seen the petitioner abducting the

deceased.

Similarly, drawing attention of the Court towards the

statements of the investigating officer recorded before the

competent criminal Court as PW-05, learned counsel submitted

that the investigating officer during his Court statements has

(Downloaded on 07/01/2025 at 09:35:20 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:53177] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-13210/2024]

admitted the fact that during the course of investigation, he had

neither collected the call details/ tower locations of the deceased

Omprakash nor recorded the statements of any eye witness of the

incident.

Lastly, learned counsel contended that in the present case,

the prosecution has completely failed in its endeavours to

establish the complete chain of circumstances so as to link the

petitioner with the alleged crime; the petitioner is in judicial

custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time,

therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-

petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and

circumstances of the present case and having perused the

statements of the eye-witness Babulal S/o Sanwat Ram (PW-01)

as well as that of the investigating officer (PW-05), this Court

prima facie finds that there is no direct evidence available on

record establishing the presence of the petitioner at the place of

incident. The recovery of the blunt weapon (danda) as well as

clothes worn by the petitioner recovered at his instance also do

not conclusively show his involvement in commission of the

alleged crime as though as per the FSL report, the blood stains

found on the blunt weapon (danda) is of human origin but the

blood grouping of the same did not match with the blood group of

(Downloaded on 07/01/2025 at 09:35:20 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:53177] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-13210/2024]

the deceased. This Court further prima facie finds that the

petitioner is behind the bars since a long period of time and

except the present case, no other criminal case is lodged against

him.

This Court prima facie also finds that whether or not the

material brought forth by the prosecution against the petitioner

would be sufficient to establish his guilt in the present case is for

the learned trial Court to determine during the course of trial. This

Court looking to the high probability that the trial against the

petitioner may take a long time to conclude, deems it suitable to

grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present case.

Needless to say, none of the observations made herein above shall

affect the rights of either of the parties during trial and this Court

refrains from commenting upon the niceties of the matter.

Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Sita Ram S/o

Govind Ram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.70/2022

registered at Police Station Kalu, District Bikaner, shall be released

on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a

personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/-

each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance

before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever

called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
190-divya/-

(Downloaded on 07/01/2025 at 09:35:20 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here