Shrawan Singh And Others vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajendra Prakash Soni, J

The prayer made in this bail petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") is for grant of bail in connection with crime registered pursuant to First Information Report Number 127/2022 of Police Station Sakada, District Jaisalmer in respect of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Earlier, petitioners made endeavor for seeking bail by way of filing first bail applications but the same were dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file fresh after submission of charge-sheet.

I may briefly refer to the relevant aspects of the case of prosecution, as emerging from the F.I.R. filed on 28.09.2022 that on the evening of 26.09.2022 when complainant Ugam Singh's father Prayag Singh was grazing goats in the forest, the accused Mahendra Singh, Shravan Singh, Paraspuri, Reshma Ram, Anwar Khan and Narpat Ram, due to previous enmity, murdered Prayag Singh. This incident was witnessed by Hari Singh, Derawar Singh and Mahendra Singh.

To begin at the beginning, Shri Kamal Rathore, learned counsel representing petitioners has fervently argued that petitioners are innocent persons and a false case has been foisted against them; that entire allegations so leveled by the Police against the petitioners are totally false and baseless.

He argued that the incident occurred on 26.09.2022 at 5:30 pm and the First Information Report was filed on the third day i.e. 28.09.2022 at about 1:00 pm, in which the applicants were described as accused. According to him, the reason for this delay was merely to falsely implicate applicants in the matter. Neither accused committed the alleged incident nor was there any eyewitness to the incident; Hari Singh, Derawar Singh, and Mahendra Singh have been made fake eyewitnesses to the incident. They did not see the alleged incident. If they had actually witnessed the incident on 26.09.2022, they would have immediately informed the complainant Ugam Singh and would have definitely discussed it in the village. They would not have kept quiet about this incident for two days, especially given that they are distant members of the complainant's family. Additionally, according to him, the blood test report on the sticks allegedly recovered from the applicants have also come out negative. Co-accused Paraspuri, Reshma Ram, Anwar Khan and Narpat Ram have already been enlarged on bail and the petitioners too deserve the same indulgence. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances the petitioners may be released on bail.

From the other side, learned Public Prosecutor for the State has strongly objected the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that the investigating officer had collected overwhelming evidence in the case which would prima-facie point towards the guilt of the accused. Keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by them, they do not deserve any leniency, rather they need to be dealt with severely. He thus, prayed that in the facts of the present case, it is expedient that accused be kept in the custody.

I have considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned public prosecutor and perused the record.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is undisputed that the First Information Report was filed after a significant delay on the third day. So called eye witnesses Hari Singh, Derawar Singh and Mahendra Singh did not inform the complainant Ugam Singh about the alleged murder and there was no discussion about the incident with anyone in the village for two days. The FSL report on the allegedly recovered lathi is also negative and no blood has been found on it. The petitioners are in custody since 29.09.2022 and 02.10.2022 respectively. The bail rejection order goes to show that they are not involved in any other case. Having regard to the facts of the case and taking into account totality of circumstances, in my considered opinion, the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners cannot be completely overlooked. Be that as it may, while desisting to make any comment on merits, I feel persuaded to exercise discretion in favour of petitioners for enlarging them on bail.

Therefore, without commenting any further on the merits of the present case as a whole, with reference to material placed before me and the fact that the trial is likely to take its own considerable time, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in detention for an indefinite period therefore, petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Consequently, this second bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners- (1) Shrawan Singh S/o Narayan Singh and (2) Mahendra Singh S/o Chain Singh in F.I.R. No. 127/2022 of Police Station Sakada, District Jaisalmer, shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the 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 and if not required by Jail Authorities in any other case. This order is subject to the condition that accused, within 7 days of their release and sureties, on the day of furnishing bail, will also furnish details of their all bank accounts, with bank and branch name, in shape of an affidavit, and submit legible copy of their Aadhar cards as well as front page of Bank pass book, for smooth recovery of penalty amount, if there arise a need for recovery of penalty under Section 446 Cr.P.C in future.