Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 2670 (RAJ)

Jahid Khan v. State of Rajasthan Through PP

2022-10-31

CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

body2022
ORDER 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C in connection with FIR No.133/2021 registered at Police Station Lalkothi, Jaipur City (East) for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 434, 307 and 302 of I.P.C. & 4/25 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in this matter, cross FIR has been lodged in which the complainant party is aggressor and proper video footage of the entire incident is available. In the present matter accused- Anas & Faizal were juveniles and the juvenile Court has acquitted them. Recovery of spade (Fawda) is falsified as there is no injury of the Fawda on the person of deceased. No specific role has been attributed of Jahid Khan, Tahir Khan & Arshad Khan. The petitioners had no weapon in their hands nor they caused any injury. Counsel further submits that charge-sheet has been filed and the conclusion of the trial will take time. Hence, petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon the orders passed in the cases of Naresh Vs. State & Anr. (S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1920/2021) decided on 06.04.2022 Rajasthan High Court, Narain Vs. State of Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1336/2001 decided on 17.04.2001 Rajasthan High Court, Ganpat Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 1998 (2) RajCriC 198, Laxmi Narain & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2001 SCC OnLine Raj. 416, Laxmi Narain Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. D.B. Criminal Appeal No.1643/2002 decided on 28.04.2005 Rajasthan High Court and Rajendra & ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2005 SCC OnLine Raj. 363. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail applications. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant that specific role of petitioners have been attributed in the statements of injured eye witnesses Sakir & Sajid and looking to the facts and gravity of offences, bail applications of the petitioners may kindly be rejected. 6. Heard. 7. Perused the file and judgment relied upon by petitioners. 8. Learned State counsel submitted the factual report which is taken on record. As per factual report, the petitioners Tahir Khan and Zahid Khan have criminal antecedents of one case each. 9. It is a case of murder of two persons namely Shabir Khan and Smt. Nafisa Khan. 6. Heard. 7. Perused the file and judgment relied upon by petitioners. 8. Learned State counsel submitted the factual report which is taken on record. As per factual report, the petitioners Tahir Khan and Zahid Khan have criminal antecedents of one case each. 9. It is a case of murder of two persons namely Shabir Khan and Smt. Nafisa Khan. The petitioners are named in the FIR. Specific role of the petitioners have been attributed in the statements of injured eye witnesses Sajid Khan & Shakir Khan. At the instance of petitioner Zahid Khan, one blood stained spade (Fawda) was recovered. At the instance of petitioner Tahir Khan, one peace of iron pipe was also recovered. As per postmortem report of Shakhir Khan & Smt. Nafisa Khan cause of death are shock brought about as a result of cumulative effect of injuries No.1 & 2. Therefore, considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the complainant and taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case and gravity of offences but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it not proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 10. Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are dismissed.