Vikram @ Vikash Kumar @ Vicky vs State Of Rajasthan And Others

Farjand Ali, J

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-Petitioners. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

S.No

Particulars of the Case

1

FIR Number

309/2023

2

Concerned Police Station

Jalore

3

District

Jalore

4

Offences alleged in the FIR

Under Section 302/34 IPC.

5

Offences added, if any

-

6

Date of passing of impugned order

29.11.2023

Learned counsel for the Petitioner No.1 - Vikram @ Vikash Kumar @ Vicky S/o Fullaram does not want to press the present misc. second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of Petitioner No.1 - Vikram @ Vikash Kumar @ Vicky S/o Fullaram.

Accordingly, the present misc. second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. qua the Petitioner No.1 - Vikram @ Vikash Kumar @ Vicky S/o Fullaram is dismissed as not pressed. However, he seeks liberty to renew the prayer for bail after the statement of prosecution witness Ronak is recorded at the trial.

So far as the case of Petitioner No.2 - Narpat Kumar S/o Fulla Ram is concerned, it is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the material available on record. A perual of the last paragraph of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. reflecting that it was the accused - Vikram @ Vikash Kumar @ Vicky who inflicted stab injuries to the victim Bheraram. From the circumstances appearing in this case, it is not discernible that whether there was any consensus, pre- concert and pre-plan among the accused to commit murder. As on date, taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances, it does not reflect that the present petitioner No.2 – Narpat Kumar S/o Fulla Ram inflicted fatal injury to the deceased and the same would be subject matter of trial. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the Petitioner in the present matter.

Accordingly, the instant misc. second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-Petitioner No.2 as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he 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 his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.