Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jabbar @ Abdul Jabbar vs State on 10 August, 2016
Author: Vijay Bishnoi
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR
RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
--------------------------------------------------------
CRIMINAL MISC. SECOND BAIL (CRLMB) No. 7298 of
2016
JABBAR @ ABDUL JABBAR
VS
STATE
Date of Order : 10.8.2016
HON'BLE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI, J.
MR. Anil Kumar Singh, for the Petitioner.
MR. A.S. Rathore, Public Prosecutor.
ORDER
-----
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.
The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 106/2014 of Police Station, Sadar, Bikaner for the offence punishable under Section 302,382,147, 148 and 149 IPC. He has preferred this Second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.02.2016 as not pressed while giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh bail application after recording the statements of Abhishek, Abdul Karim and Javed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the prosecution has not produced Abhishek and Javed as witnesses and left them out, so their statements have not been recorded, however, the statement of Abdul Karim has been recorded as PW-2 and from the perusal of the said statements, it cannot be said that the petitioner was involved in commission of crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the police has connected the accused-petitioner with the commission of crime on the basis of the recovery of one Mobile Phone and One Shirt, alleging that the same were blood stained, however, after examining the said articles, the FSL, did not form any opinion regarding the blood group found over the said articles. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that though the prosecution has procuded PW-2 Abdul Karim as eye witness but his statement before the police were recorded, after about 06 days of the incident. It is also argued that from the statement of PW-2 it is clear that he was not the eye witness but later on he was made a witness to the incident. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case though initially he was not named in the F.I.R.
Per contra learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have aruged that PW-2 Abdul Karim has identified the petitioner and also specifically stated that the accused had assulted the deceased. It is also argued that the bail applications of similarly situated accused persons namely Pillu and other accused persons have been rejected by this Court. Therfore, no case for granting the bail to the petitioner is made out.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this Second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Jabbar @ Abdul Jabbar son of Abdul Sattar @ Sattar Ali shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.106/2014 of Police Station, Sadar Bikaner provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
(VIJAY BISHNOI), J.
M.Akbar Item No.48