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
19 paragraphs · 435 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.
The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.465/2017 of Police Station Anoopgarh, District Ganganagar for the offences punishable under Sections
302, 341 and 34 of IPC. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while dismissing the second bail application of the petitioner, this Court has granted liberty to the
petitioner to move fresh bail application before the trial court after recording the statement of complainant Avatar Singh and witnesses of recovery of
pistol from the petitioners namely Sunil and Navjot. It is submitted that as per the report submitted by the prosecution before the trial court, the
complainant Avtar Singh had already died, therefore, now it is not possible to record his statement. It is submitted that so far as regarding witnesses of
recovery of pistol from the petitioners i.e. Sunil and Navjot are concerned, their statements have been recorded before the trial court as PW-1 and
PW-2, however, both the witnesses have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. They have specifically stated that the police have not
recovered any pistol at the instance of the petitioners in their presence. It is submitted that there is no eye-witness in the case and the complainant
have also lodged a complaint of this effect that two persons had informed him that they killed his father but he does not know them. It is submitted that
the police have implicated the petitioner in commission of crime on the basis of recovery of pistol, however, when the recovery witnesses have not
supported the prosecution story and turned hostile, it is clear that it is a case of false implication.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Rajendra Singh S/o Jagga Singh shall be
released on bail in connection with FIR No.465/2017 of Police Station Anoopgarh, District Ganganagar provided he executes a personal bond in a sum
of Rs.50,000/-with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on
each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
