Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suresh Pal vs State on 3 April, 2017
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 1106 / 2017
Suresh Pal S/o Shri Sher Singh, By Caste Jat, Resident of Ludi
Jhabar, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu
(At Present Lodged in Sub Jail Rajgarh, District Churu)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.S. Choudhary, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Amardeep Lamba.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arjun Singh, PP.
For complainant : Mr. Devendra Mahalana.
Mr. Anil Bishnoi, C.I., P.S. Rajgarh, Dist. Churu present in person.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Order 03/04/2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner parties. Perused the material available on record including the case diary.
The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.455/2012, registered at Police Station Rajgarh, District Churu for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 307/149 and 120B IPC.
The FIR of the case at hand was registered on 20.11.2012 with the allegation that some unknown assailants, entered the office of Bahujan Samajvadi Party at Rajgarh Town on 18.11.2012 at about 06.00-06.30 pm. and fired gun-shots whereby, the first informant Manoj Nyangali, Naresh Singh and Manoj Meena (2 of 4) [CRLMB-1106/2017] received firearm injuries. On the basis of Parcha Bayan of Manoj Nyangali to this effect, recorded at the Government Hospital Hisar, FIR No.455/2012 was registered at the Police Station Rajgarh and investigation commenced. During course of investigation, the investigating agency appears to have arrived to a conclusion that the gun-shots were fired by the accused Shyam Sunder @ Sundariya. One Pradeep @ Kaale was arrested in this case. His bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 06.06.2013 and thereafter, he has been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 28.04.2014. The said accused was identified by two eye witnesses in test identification proceedings. The present petitioner was arrested in this case on 01.08.2016 and thereafter, it is alleged that he was subjected to test identification by the concerned witnesses and two of them i.e. Manoj Meena and Surendra claim to have correctly identified the petitioner as a participant in the incident. However, Shri Choudhary, learned Sr. Counsel representing the petitioner contended that the entire identification proceedings are nothing but a farce. The petitioner had been arrested in the year 2013 by the officers of the Police Station Rajgarh in relation to FIR No.433/2013 pertaining to the offence under the Arms Act. If at all, complicity of the petitioner in this case was even suspected, he could easily have been arrested then and there. He drew the Court's attention to another FIR No.85/2008 registered at the Police Station Rajgarh by Virendra Singh, brother of the first informant of present case namely Manoj Nyangali. After investigation of the said FIR, the police charge-sheeted the (3 of 4) [CRLMB-1106/2017] present petitioner as accused No.3. Learned counsel Shri Choudhary thus submits that the petitioner was well known to the complainant party much before the incident at hand and had he participated in the incident, there was no occasion for non- disclosure of his name in the FIR or during investigation. He urges that the co-accused Pradeep @ Kaale having been enlarged on bail, the petitioner also deserves to be enlarged on bail on parity.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the investigating officer and Shri Devendra Mahalana, learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel and urged that the petitioner was absconding and could be arrested with great difficulty. He has been identified by the injured Manoj Singh and thus, his case is distinguishable from that of Pradeep @ Kaale and hence, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.
Indisputably, the petitioner was charge-sheeted in an earlier FIR involving the offence under Section 307 IPC which was lodged by Virendra Singh, the brother of the present first informant Manoj. Thus, possibility of his being known to the complainant party from before the incident is imminent. While investigation of the case at hand was underway, the petitioner was also arrested by the officers of the Police Station Rajgarh in November, 2013 for the offence under the Indian Arms Act. Had there been a semblance of doubt about the petitioner's complicity in the case at (4 of 4) [CRLMB-1106/2017] hand, the officers of the Police Station Rajgarh could have informed the CID (CB) which was then investigating the case and the petitioner would have been taken in custody immediately. Apparently, the argument put forth by the prosecution side regarding the petitioner's abscondence is unacceptable as during this very period, he had been arrested in a case under Arms Act registered at the same police station in November, 2013 and is reported to have been bailed out. Co-accused Pradeep @ Kaale who too was identified by some of the eye-witnesses has been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner's identification at the hands of the concerned witnesses was got conducted after nearly four years of the incident.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances available on record but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves to be released on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Suresh Pal S/o Shri Sher Singh arrested in connection with the F.I.R. No. 455/2012, registered at Police Station Rajgarh, District Churu shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.
Tikam/52