SURENDRA URF KALU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by petitioners (1) Surendra @ Kallu S/o Shri Sultan and (2) Baijnath S/o Shri Parshottam, who are accused for offence u/Ss.399, 402 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act in FIR No.382/2011 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Dholpur contending that accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated as an accused in the present case for the offences aforestated, whereas fact is that they are innocent. Allegation against accused-petitioner Surendra @ Kallu is only one under u/S.399 IPC. Challan has been filed. Co-accused Rakesh and Deva @ Devendra have already been enlarged on bail by orders of the co-ordinate bench of this court dated 9/12/2011 and 19/12/2011, respectively. Petitioners are in jail since 21/9/2011. Trial may take long. Petitioners have contended in the bail application that they are ready to face the trial. There are no chances of their fleeing from justice. There is no other case registered against petitioners.

(2.) REPRESENTATIVE of the learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application but is not in a position to controvert the facts aforestated. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail u/S.439 Cr.P.C. In the result, this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioners (1) Surendra @ Kallu S/o Shri Sultan and (2) Baijnath S/o Shri Parshottam shall be released on bail in FIR No.382/2011 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Dholpur for offence u/Ss.399, 402 IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act upon their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for their appearance before the trial court on all dates of hearing until conclusion of the trial. However, in case it is found that any other criminal case is pending against petitioners and that misstatement has been made about their whereabouts or non-registration of any other criminal case or any new criminal case in future is registered against them or they are again found indulged in committing similar offence in future, the bail so granted to them by this court would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of the prosecution even by the trial court. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.