Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rohtash And Ors vs State Of Raj Asthan Through Pp on 8 July, 2011
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR 1. S.B. CR.MISC.BAIL APPLICATION NO.6335/2011 Rohtash & Ors. Vs. State 2. S.B. CR. MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.6134/2011 Roshan vs. State Date of order : 8/7/2011. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Mohd. Iqbal Khan for the petitioners.
Shri Amit Punia, P.P. for the State.
****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.
Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that in the injury report only one apparent injury was there, though in the C.T. scan report, a fracture on head of injured Mangat Ram has been shown. Mangat Ram in his statement has attributed this injury to petitioner no.1 Rohtash and petitioner no.3 Balijeet, whereas another injured Sampat has attributed this injury to petitioner Rohtash only.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and argued that there are several eye witnesses who attributed this injury to both Rohtash and Balijeet.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case but taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarged petitioners Rohtash and Balijeet on bail at this state. Their bail application is dismissed. They would again apply for bail after the statement of injured Mangat Ram, Sampat and Medical Officer are recorded. Prosecution to examine those witnesses on priority basis. However, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioners Bhallur Ram and Roshan on bail.
In the result, this bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. is partly allowed and it is directed that petitioners (1) Bhallur S/o Shri Ram and (2) Roshan S/o Shyoram shall be released on bail in F.I.R. No.196/2011, P.S. Tijara, Distt. Alwar for offence u/s.323/341, 307/34 of IPC on each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before that court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till conclusion of the trial.
However, in case it is found that any other criminal case is pending against petitioners and that misstatement has been made about their whereabouts or non-registration of any other criminal case or any new case in future is registered against them, the bail so granted to them by this court in this bail application would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of prosecution even by the trial court.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.
RS/