Balveer @ Billu vs State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.190/2018 of Police Station Sidhmukh, District Churu for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 332, 353, 427 I.P.C. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that allegation against the petitioner to the effect that he tried to kill police personnel by running over a jeep on them is absolutely false. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of the Court towards the statements of prosecution witnesses and has submitted that the police constables, whose statements have been recorded before the trial court, has specifically admitted that police personnel did not receive any injury and the police vehicle was also not damaged.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that during the course of investigation, the police recorded statements of two private persons, who have also alleged that the petitioner tried to run over a jeep on the police personnel but at the time of their examination before the trial court, they did not support the prosecution story and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all the witnesses are police personnel and they are interested witnesses. It is further submitted that even if the evidence of those police personnel is analyzed, it would be clear that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case as none of the police personnel was injured and the police vehicle was also not damaged. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 23.3.2019 and till date only 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined and trial of the case will take time. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that owner of the vehicle (PW-6) has also been examined before the trial court wherein he has also stated that the police have not borrowed his jeep for the purpose of chasing the petitioner.

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that only evidence is available on record to connect the petitioner with commission of crime.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.