High CourtsSingle Bench

Pinki vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 12 July 2023 · Citation: (2023) 07 RAJ CK 0039

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kuldeep Mathur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 161, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 302, 342
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1070 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 · 380 words

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.250/2022 registered at Police Station Sayara, District Udaipur, for offences under Sections 302, 342/34 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards F.I.R. and statements of eye witness Smt. Tanku Bai recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that eye witness in her statements has attributed fatal injuries to the co-accused Anna Ram, who repeatedly caused injuries to the deceased with lathi on his head, hands and leg. Learned counsel submitted that from perusal of the postmortem report, it is clear that the main cause of death of the deceased was multiple injuries inflicted to him by the co-accused Anna Ram. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner who is a lady is in judicial custody, challan has been filed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that fatal injuries have been attributed by the eye-witness to the co-accused Anna Ram.

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

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/ demerits of the case, this Court is inclined 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- Smt. Pinki D/ o Dhannaram shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.250/2022 registered at Police Station Sayara, District Udaipur, provided she 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 her appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so.

It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.