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 · 362 wordsKuldeep 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 F.I.R. No.106/2022 registered at Police Station Borunda, District Jodhpur, for offences under Sections 147, 148, 365, 323, 379 and 302/149 of the IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the challan papers; factual report of the case submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court finds that as per prosecution, on 31.07.2022, the petitioner alongwith co-accused persons namely Ravi Tiwari, Ghanshyam Chouhan, Dara Singh, Narendra and Mahendra, brutally assaulted deceased-Shyam Lal with lathis and iron pipes. Deceased-Shyam Lal was taken to the nearby hospital where he succumbed to the injuries.
On a careful scrutiny of the challan papers and documents annexed therewith, this Court prima facie finds that eye-witnesses of the incident namely Baksha Ram son of Bheeka Ram, Ojha Ram son of Dhagla Ram, etc., in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., have stated that they had seen the petitioner assaulting the deceased with co-accused persons.
This Court also prima facie finds that weapon (lathi) alleged used in commission of the crime has been recovered at the instance of the present petitioner. This Court also prima facie finds that some money transaction had also taken place between the present petitioner and co-accused persons in connection with the alleged crime.
In the prima facie opinion of this Court, there is allegation against the petitioner of inflicting repeated injuries upon the deceased with blunt weapon with co-accused persons. Since the petitioner has been charged with the offences punishable under Section 302 read with 149 IPC, at this stage, his individual role in the commission of the crime can neither be ascertained nor can be considered. Therefore, looking to the seriousness of the accusations and looking to the nature and gravity of the offences coupled with the evidence available on record against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.