Narayan vs State Of Rajasthan

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.82/2022 registered at Police Station Banera, District Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 302, 201, 397, 450/120-B of IPC.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the information provided by the co-accused-Ugam Lal Jaat under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecution, the petitioner conspired with co-accused to kill deceased-Sajna, in order to grab her agriculture land. Learned counsel submitted that there is no plausible evidence available with prosecution to show petitioner’s involvement in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that deceased-Sajna was murdered on 19.05.2022 whereas, according to the statement of co-accused, necessary and relevant documents for facilitating registration of the land in the name of present petitioner were already handed over by him to the present petitioner on 18.05.2022. Learned counsel submitted that even if version of co-accused is accepted, then also the petitioner could not have motive to kill/murder the deceased.

Learned counsel submitted that the case against the petitioner is based purely on circumstantial evidence. It was submitted that from the perusal of the challan papers, it is evident that the prosecution has failed to complete the chain of circumstances to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. Learned counsel submitted that there is nothing on record to prove that the prime accused committed the crime at the instance or instigation of the petitioner.

Lastly, it was submitted that as per prosecution, on the basis of the information provided by the present petitioner under Section 27, Aadhar card, Ration card and coloured photographs of the deceased were recovered from his possession. According to learned counsel, even if the same is treated to be correct then also the same in itself is not sufficient evidence to establish any link between the petitioner and the alleged crime. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; challan has already been filed and trial of the case may take sufficiently long time to conclude, therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

Heard.

Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that sufficient evidence is not available on record to establish that petitioner conspired with co-accused person and played an active role in the commission of crime. Keeping in view that the petitioner is in judicial custody and also looking to the possibility that the trial may take long time to conclude, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Narayan S/ o Ram Karan Jat shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.82/2022 registered at Police Station Banera, District Bhilwara 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 as and when called upon to do so.