Dharamveer Vs. State of Rajasthan
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 318 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 482/2000)
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 482/2000)
Petitioner: Dharamveer
Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 318 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 482/2000)
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 482/2000)
Judges: K.T. THOMAS & D.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 31, 2000
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Section 438 – Bail – Case under Section 302/34 IPC – FIR attributing main role to an advocate – Said advocate already granted bail by High Court – His son also released on bail. Held that the case of appellant was not worse than the advocate who was attributed main role. Hence, bail granted.
(Paras 3, 4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Petitioner is one of the accused in a case involving Section 302, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the averments contained in the FIR, the main role has been attributed to Dharam Pal, advocate. It is an admitted fact that High Court has granted bail to Dharam Pal, advocate. Besides that, Dharam Pal’s son, Vijay Pal, was also released on bail by the High Court. Though this has been raised as a ground before the High Court, learned Single Judge was not persuaded to grant bail to this appellant on the following reasoning : “Looking to the averments made and statement of eye witness no case is made out for the grant of bail to the petitioner.”
3. For the purpose of this bail matter, we are unable to treat this appellant in a worse position than Dharam Pal who is attributed with the major role by the person who lodged the FIR and who himself was an eye witness.
4. We, therefore, order the appellant to be released on bail on executing a bond with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the District and Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. It is open to the Sessions Judge to impose any other condition which he deems fit.
5. The appeal is disposed of.
1. Leave granted.
2. Petitioner is one of the accused in a case involving Section 302, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the averments contained in the FIR, the main role has been attributed to Dharam Pal, advocate. It is an admitted fact that High Court has granted bail to Dharam Pal, advocate. Besides that, Dharam Pal’s son, Vijay Pal, was also released on bail by the High Court. Though this has been raised as a ground before the High Court, learned Single Judge was not persuaded to grant bail to this appellant on the following reasoning : “Looking to the averments made and statement of eye witness no case is made out for the grant of bail to the petitioner.”
3. For the purpose of this bail matter, we are unable to treat this appellant in a worse position than Dharam Pal who is attributed with the major role by the person who lodged the FIR and who himself was an eye witness.
4. We, therefore, order the appellant to be released on bail on executing a bond with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the District and Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. It is open to the Sessions Judge to impose any other condition which he deems fit.
5. The appeal is disposed of.
