SIYARAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application under Sec. 439(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed for cancellation of bail granted to the accused respondent by the Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Bharatpur vide order dtd. 19/1/2024.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to lodging of the instant FIR, one more FIR was registered by one Sunil Kumar, nephew of the petitioner, against the accused-respondent wherein the respondent has been alleged to have abused and beaten Sunil and his family members. Learned counsel submits that as per the instant FIR, the accused- respondent has caused certain injuries on the legs of the victim, namely Sunil, and looking to the gravity of the matter, bail should not have been granted to the accused-respondent by the learned Trial Judge. Learned counsel submits that the accused-respondent is a habitual offender against whom eight criminal cases are pending. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, bail granted to the accused-respondent be cancelled.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the accused-respondent opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that after appreciating the evidence available on the record, indulgence of bail was granted to the respondent. Learned counsel submits that mere pendency of criminal cases is not a ground for cancellation of bail. Learned counsel submits that a cogent and reasoned order has been passed by the learned Trial Judge while exercising its jurisdiction of granting bail to the accused-respondent, hence under these circumstances, interference of this court is not warranted.