Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rajkumar Urf Vihvendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 12 January, 2012
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN 1. S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.12749/2011 Pinta @ Pintu Vs. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor 2. S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.12140/2011 Rajkumar @ Vishvendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor Date of Order ::: 12.01.2012 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq None present for petitioners Shri Trilok Chand, ASI, representative of Public Prosecutor #### By the Court:-
Heard representative of Public Prosecutor and perused material made available to me during course of arguments.
These two bail applications have been filed by accused-petitioners, namely, Pinta @ Pintu and Rajkumar @ Vishvendra Singh, with prayer that they be granted bail pending trial under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.181/2011, Police Station Rajakhera, District Dholpur, for offence under Section 394 IPC. It is contended in the bail applications that the petitioners were not named in the FIR and only person, who was named therein, was Jitendra Thakur @ Jeetu S/o Nahar Singh, but the witness Kailash Behari @ Ramu S/o complainant Ramesh Chand Soni, in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has stated that their names were wrongly mentioned in the FIR. Informant Ramesh Chand Soni, in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., initially named accused Bhanwar Singh @ Bhanwra, and subsequently has given the name of Jitendra Thakur @ Jeetu. Petitioners were not subjected to any test identification parade. In similar circumstances, accused Bhanwar Singh @ Bhanwra, who was also made accused along-with petitioners, has been enlarged on bail by order dated 05.12.2011 of a coordinate bench of this court in S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.11072/2011. Challan has already been filed and their detention is therefore no more required. They are local residents and would be available to face the trial. There is no chance of fleeing the petitioners from justice. A perusal of the case-diary reveals that both the accused-petitioners were arrested on 02.08.2011. Case of co-accused Bhanwar Singh @ Bhanwra, who has been granted bail, is identical to the case of present petitioners and he was arrested on 14.12.2011. As per the representative of the Public Prosecutor, the Station House Officer, Police Station Rajakhera, has informed that except this there is no other criminal case reported to have been registered against the petitioners.
Representative of Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.
After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits, I deem it just and proper to allow these bail applications. It is therefore ordered that accused-petitioners, namely, (1) Pinta @ Pintu S/o Shri Ganpati Singh, Resident of Bhuteshwar Mohalla, Kasba Rajakhera, District Dholpur and (2) Rajkumar @ Vishvendra Singh S/o Shri Rajendra Thakur, Resident of Gandhi-Nihalsingh, Samshabad, District Agra, be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.181/2011, Police Station Rajakheda, District Dholpur, under Section 394 IPC, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for their appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
However, in case it is found that any criminal case is found pending against petitioners or that petitioners are again found indulging in similar or any other offence at any point of time in future, the bail granted to them by this court in present case would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of prosecution on this ground alone and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in bail bonds produced by petitioners, and sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by Tehsildar of area concerned.
The bail applications stand disposed of.
(Mohammad Rafiq) J.
//Jaiman// All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.
Giriraj Prasad Jaiman PS-cum-JW