Bhana Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27371) on 18 June, 2025

0
1


Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Bhana Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27371) on 18 June, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:27371]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                               JODHPUR
      S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13666/2024

 Bhana Ram S/o Singa Ram, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Village -
 Nichala Sabela, P.s Pindwara ,dist.-Sirohi (Raj.) (Lodged In Jail,
 Sirohi, Dist.sirohi )
                                                      ----Petitioner
                             Versus
 State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                    ----Respondent



For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Prem Dayal Bohra
For Respondent(s)             :     Mr. CS Ojha, PP



                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

18/06/2025

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of

filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 BNSS at

the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the

matter are tabulated herein below:

S.No.                          Particulars of the Case
     1.    FIR Number                                   55/2024
     2.    Concerned Police Station                     Sarupganj
     3.    District                                     Sirohi
     4.    Offences alleged in the FIR                 Under Sections 147, 148,
                                                           149, 332, 353, 302
                                                           of IPC and Section
                                                           4/25 of Arms Act
     5.    Offences added, if any                       -

6. Date of passing of impugned 05.10.2024
order

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no

case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his

incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in

the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the

(Downloaded on 19/06/2025 at 09:06:52 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27371] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-13666/2024]

accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based

on conjectures and surmises.

3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the

petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail

application and submits that the present case is not fit for

enlargement of accused on bail.

4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties

and have perused the challan papers and other material

available on record.

In an unfortunate incident, the constable Niranjan Singh

was beaten to death by some boys perhaps after a hot

altercation in a village fair between the boys and the

constable. Admittedly, there was no previous animosity and

known motive for the accused to commit the crime. 12

persons have been named as assailants in the FIR lodged at

the instance of A.S.I., Kailash Chandra who claims to have

been staying at Swarupganj police station since last three

years. In the FIR submitted by the A.S.I., Kailash Chandra,

the name of the petitioner does not find place. The incident

took place on 08.03.2024, however, on the next day, i.e., on

09.03.2024, when his statement were recorded under Section

161 of the Cr.P.C., he stated that he made an inquiry after the

incident and then got to know about the presence of the

petitioner also at the village fair along with the assailants.

Head-constable Vaaga Ram was accompanying A.S.I., Kailash

Chandra when he reached at the spot and apprehended 12

persons. He was examined by the police on 10.03.2024,

(Downloaded on 19/06/2025 at 09:06:52 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27371] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-13666/2024]

wherein he claimed to identify the petitioner also among the

assailants. Interestingly, the facts narrated by head-constable

Vaaga Ram regarding indulgence of the petitioner has not

been corborated by A.S.I., Kailash Chandra.

Firstly, if head-constable Vaaga Ram had identified the

petitioner also as an assailant, then name of the petitioner

must have been included in the FIR which was lodged after a

gap of time. Since he was very much present with A.S.I.

Kailash Chandra. Secondly, if the claim of Vaaga Ram

regarding identification of petitioner as an assailant was true,

then the said fact must have been incorporated by A.S.I.,

Kailash Chandra in his statement dated 09.03.2024 to say

that his companion Vaaga Ram had identified the petitioner

among the assailants but a different source was shown by

him. Thirdly, the murder weapon is not recovered from the

petitioner and no direct evidence is there.

After making scrutiney of the material, it is observed

that the bald, vague and after thought statement of Vaaga

Ram and A.S.I., Kailash Chandra, there is nothing which can

be said to be a piece of incriminating evidence. It is trite law

that grave the offence, greater have to be the standard of

proof and when it comes to the question of liberty of an

individual which is otherwise guaranteed by the Constitution

of India, any infringement or restrain can only be made in

accordance with the procedure established by law and the

procedure must always be fair, reasonable and just. Detention

of an accused pending trial can be made in certain

(Downloaded on 19/06/2025 at 09:06:52 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27371] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-13666/2024]

circumstances among which the paramount would be the

nature and gravity of offence, the punishment which can be

inflicted upon conviction, the quality of the evidence collected

during investigation as well as the apprehension of hampering

or tampering the evidence and the flight risk of the accused.

No apprehension has been shown that if released on bail, the

petitioner, who is a young boy, would flee from justice or

would not be readily available for trial. He was arrested in this

case on 21.05.2024, thus considering over all facts and

circumstances mentioned above and the trial make take long

time to conclude, this Court feels it appropriate to extend the

benefit of bail to him. Before parting, it is clarified that the

observation made hereinabove are limited to the justifiable

disposal of bail application only and the same would have no

bearance on the course of trial and proceeding judge shall not

get influence of it in any manner.

5. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C./483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the

accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be

enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the

sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to

the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance

before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and

when called upon to do so.

(FARJAND ALI),J
4-chhavi/-

(Downloaded on 19/06/2025 at 09:06:52 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here