High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Narsing Dan Son of Ranidan vs State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 16 November 2017 · Citation: (2017) 11 RAJ CK 0041

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.K. Lohra
CASE NUMBER
10330 of 2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

51 paragraphs · 475 words
1.

Accused-petitioner Narsing Dan has made this second

attempt for seeking bail in connection with FIR No.17/2017 of

Police Station Girab, District Barmer, wherein he is charged for

offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 323,

326 and 307 IPC.

2.

Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet in the

matter and presently trial of Sessions Case No.63/2017 is under

progress before Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Barmer (for short,

''learned trial Court'').

3.

First bail application laid on behalf of petitioner was

dismissed as not pressed with liberty to renew prayer for grant of

bail after recording statements of injured witness Kailash Dan and

the doctor (Jurist).

4.

Pressing this second bail application, it is argued by learned

counsel for the petitioner that subsequent to rejection of first bail

application, during trial, statements of Dr. Narendra Kumar are

recorded as P.W.1. Learned counsel further submits that as per

statements of P.W.1, injuries suffered by victim are though

grievous in nature but not dangerous to life. Learned counsel

has, therefore, contended that per se offence under Section 307

IPC is not made out. It is also argued by learned counsel that the

injured witness, Kailash Dan, is not turning up for deposition

before the learned trial Court despite issuance of bailable and

arrest warrants. It is further argued by learned counsel that

arrest warrants were issued twice against Kailash Dan yet he has

not appeared before the learned trial Court for recording his

statements although he is a Government servant. In support

thereof, learned counsel has placed on record order-sheets of the

learned trial Court, which clearly indicate that he was summoned

twice by arrest warrants. It is in that background learned counsel

has argued that the injured witness is deliberately prolonging

proceedings and is not willing to tender his evidence as witness in

the matter.

5.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the second bail

application.

6.

I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments

advanced at Bar and considering a very vital fact that Dr.

Narendra Kumar (P.W.1) has been examined and injured witness

Kailash Dan is not turning up for deposition despite issuing

bailable and even arrest warrants. In this view of the matter while

taking into account substantial change in the circumstances,

without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I feel

persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7.

Accordingly, this second bail application under Section 439

Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner, Narsing

Dan S/o Ranidan, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.17/2017 of

Police Station Girab, District Barmer, may be released on bail;

provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two

surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of 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.