High CourtsSingle Bench

Lalit vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 11 May 2023 · Citation: (2023) 05 RAJ CK 0101

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 147, 148, 149, 302, 323 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 3, 25
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5573 Of 2023
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 · 433 words

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J

The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.283/2019, Police Station Siwana, District Barmer, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 323/149, 307/149, 302, 120-B of IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act.

Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

After the rejection of the first bail application of the petitioner on 05.11.2020, the statement of three prosecution witnesses have been recorded before the trial court including the statement of P.W.3 Malam Singh, who is the eye-witness of the incident.

Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been assigned any injury. He submits that in the present case, there was a free fight between the petitioner party and the complainant, which is clear form the fact that the petitioner Lalit as well as Vikram Singh have received gunfire injuries. Learned Sr. Counsel further submits that there is an ongoing litigation between deceased Chotu Singh and Prithvi Singh and the present incident was only with respect to take revenge from each other. He submits that the firearm injury, which is the cause of death of Chotu Singh is not assigned to the present petitioner. He further submits that similarly situated person, whose name is reflected in the statement of P.W.3 Malam Singh and who was identified along with the petitioner in the Central Jail, namely, Suraj Singh has been enlarged on bail by this Court. Learned counsel also submits that there is no recovery of firearm from the present petitioner. The petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than three years. He, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

Consequently, the present second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Lalit S/o Ram Ratan Bhati arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.283/2019, Police Station Siwana, District Barmer shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees : Twenty Five Thousand Only) 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.