High CourtsSingle Bench

Geetam Singh And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 16 September 2020 · Citation: (2020) 09 RAJ CK 0049

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chandra Kumar Songara, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 308, 323, 336, 341, 427, 504
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10532 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 409 words

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C in connection with FIR No. 133/2020 registered at Police Station Rajakhera, Dholpur for the offences under sections 143, 323, 341, 336 and 504 IPC (later on converted under Sections 323, 341, 308, 504 and 34 IPC).

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that co-accused have been enlarged on bail by the trial court. Regarding the same incident, an FIR No. 134/2020 was also lodged by the petitioner no.1 for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 427 and 504 IPC against the members of the complainant party. As per the medical report, there is no injury of sharp edged weapon. There is a cross case also from the side of the petitioners. Petitioners are not habitual offenders. Hence, the bail application of the petitioners may be granted.

Whereas, learned Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the bail application and has submitted that injured Harendra sustained twenty one injuries, out of them, three are fractures. Hence, the bail application of the petitioners be rejected.

As per the FIR, Geetam has inflicted injuries to Harendra on his head with an axe and Satyabhan has inflicted injuries to Harendra on his waist with rod. As per injury report and X-ray report of injured Harendra, he sustained twenty one injuries, out of them, three are grievous in nature as they are on his skull, left mandibular region and left elbow.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the State and the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it not proper to enlarge the petitioner Geetam Singh on bail.

Accordingly, bail application filed on behalf of petitioner no.1 Geetam Singh is rejected.

Whereas, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this court deems it proper to enlarge the petitioner Satyabhan on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application filed on behalf of petitioner no.2 Satyabhan under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Satyabhan shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of  Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.