Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 494 (RAJ)

Sattu @ Satyanarayan v. State of Rajasthan

2011-03-04

MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

body2011
Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. This third bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner for interim bail on the ground that his wife is seriously ill and is under regular treatment and further the doctor has advised her for operation of Uterus and there is no one in the family to look after her to make arrangements of operation etc. The first bail application of the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected as withdrawn by the order of this court dated 11.4.2008. The second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. moved by the accused petitioner was rejected by this court by a detailed order 23.3.2009. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 13.10.2006 complainant Surendra Sharma @ Bholu, submitted a written report, on the basis of which an FIR No. 698/2006 at Police Station Nayapura, Kota for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 IPC was registered against he accused persons. 4. The police after investigation submitted charge sheet against seven accused persons namely Brijmohan, Govind, Vinod, Raja @ Rajesh, Kanhaiyalal, Vijay and Jeetu @ Jitendra for the offence under sections 302, 148, 149, 201, 216 and 120 B IPC and investigation was kept pending against the main accused petitioner under section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Lateron the accused petitioner surrendered himself in the court concerned. Thereafter, the police submitted supplementary charge sheet under Sections 302, 148, 149 and 120 B IPC against the accused petitioner with two other persons namely Radhey Shyam and Badal. 5. While rejecting the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. of the accused petitioner this court observed as under: "From a bare perusal of the facts of the case, order dated 27.2.2008 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kota, other material made available to me as also past conduct of the accused petitioner, it is clear that the accused petitioner is a habitual offender, as 17 criminal cases have been registered against him and after rejection of the first bail application, I find that no subsequent development have taken place in the instant case. Thus the accused petitioner does not deserve to the benefit of second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C." 6. Mr. Pradeep Shrimal, Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner is a hardened criminal. Thus the accused petitioner does not deserve to the benefit of second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C." 6. Mr. Pradeep Shrimal, Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner is a hardened criminal. He is main accused in this case, as many as 17 criminal cases have been registered against him. As there are serious allegations of section 302 IPC against the accused petitioner, at this stage it is not a fit case to release the accused petitioner on interim bail. 7. I have considered the rival submissions. It may be mentioned that on 11.6.2007 the accused petitioner moved bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and the same was dismissed for non-prosecution by the order of this court dated 27.7.2007. Thereafter the petitioner moved second bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. on 13.12.2007. This second bail application was rejected on 8.1.2008 as the petitioner was arrested on 13.12.2007. The Sessions Judge while rejecting the bail application of the accused petitioner in his order dated 27.2.2008 observed that the wife of the deceased Amita Sharma in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that the accused petitioner was having an enmity with her husband. Looking to the serious allegations of section 302 IPC against the accused petitioner and as he is a habitual offender and there are 17 criminal cases registered against him, the accused petitioner is not entitled for interim bail particularly on the ground that his wife is to be operated for removing Uterus. 8. In the result, this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for interim bail is devoid of merit stands rejected.