SONU URF SURENDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. have been filed by petitioners Santosh Kumar, Jaidev, Mangilal and Sonu @ Surendra, who are accused for offence u/Ss.341, 323, 325 and 307 IPC in FIR No.340/2011 registered at Police Station Kaithun, District Kota (Raj.). It is contended by Shri Mahendra Singh S/o Roop Singh, elder brother of accused-petitioner-Sonu@Surendra that accused petitioners Santosh Kumar and Mangilal are not even named in the FIR and they have been subsequently enrobbed as an accused. The dispute has taken place in which accused petitioner Jaidev was given severe beating by the sons of injured Shehjad leading to his fracture in which his sons were arrested. It is contended that allegation against Jaidev is of inflicting a blow on the head of injured Shehjad by use of Sword but there is no fracture as per x-ray report on his skull. He sustained fracture of tibia and fubula as per x-ray report dated 9/10/2011. There is no specific allegation against accused petitioner except Jaidev of causing of any injury on any part of the body of the injured. General allegation has been made. Petitioners Jaidv and Sonu @ Surendra have been arrested on 4/11/2011, petitioner-Mangilal was arrested on 5/11/2011 and petitioner-Santosh Kumar was arrested on 11/10/2011. Trial may take long. There is no previously registered criminal case against any of the petitioners. They are ready to face the trial. There is no chance of their fleeing from justice. Representative of the learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications but could not point out from the case diary any other criminal case previously registered against petitioners.

(2.) 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.