Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Om Prakash vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:26730) on 3 July, 2024
Author: Rajendra Prakash Soni
Bench: Rajendra Prakash Soni
[2024:RJ-JD:26730]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7226/2024
Om Prakash S/o Ladhu Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Rohila
East, Police Station Dhorimanna, District Barmer. (At Present
Lodged In District Jail Balotra)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Laxman Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG with
Mr. Rajat Chhaparwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
Order 03/07/2024
1. Arrested in furtherance of FIR No.95/2024, registered at Police Station Gudamalani, District Barmer, petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing him on bail. The petitioner is charged for offences punishable under Sections 279, 307, 353 of the IPC and Section 3 of PDPP Act.
2. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully.
3. Having given anxious consideration to the rival submissions and having examined the record with reference to the law applicable, I am clearly of the view that no doubt co-accused Dinesh has given benefit of bail by the Sessions Court yet the record reveals that petitioner is a habitual offender for the last fourteen years. Since 2010 a total of 54 FIR have been lodged (Downloaded on 19/07/2024 at 09:00:59 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:26730] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-7226/2024] against him which involves offences of theft, cheating, robbery, drug paddling and attempt to commit murder.
4. In view of the enormous prima facie material placed on record in respect of the petitioner, the allegations leveled against the petitioner, I am of the considered view that looking to the criminal history of the petitioner, nature and gravity of the accusation in the instant case, the role attributed to the petitioner, the antecedents of the petitioner and the case set up against petitioner in its entirety, the petitioner is not found entitled to be released on bail. In my opinion petitioner is not entitled to any sympathy from this Court either on account of his age or infirmity for his release on bail.
5. On these considerations and in view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that accused has failed to carve out a strong case for bail in his favour. Bail application therefore, is utterly misconceived under law hence deserves to be dismissed. Dismissed accordingly. The above observations shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case.
(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J 67-suraj/-
(Downloaded on 19/07/2024 at 09:00:59 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)