1 (CIS No.

340/2023)
Order dated 15.02.2023

Court: Additional Sessions Judge, K.No.3 Udaipur (Raj)

Presiding Officer Vikram Singh, R. J.
s. (District Judge Cadre)

Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 340 / 2023

First Information Report Number 18/23 Police Station Hiranmagari

Siddharth Father Anil Age 20 Years, Profession Education Resident 1-th-1, Prabhatnagar, Hiranmangri
Sector 5, Police Station Hiranmangri, Udaipur Hall House No. 6 J9V.I.P. Colony, Sector 9
Police Station Savina, Udaipur (Raj.)
(Order passed by Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur in S. B. Ci. Misc. Appl. No. 376/ 18 dated 04.07.2018
The caste of the accused has not been mentioned in the crib.) applicant laccused
-:Vs :

Public Prosecutor, Udaipur through the State of Rajasthan Opponent / Plaintiff

Bail application under section 439 D.P.No.

Presence :
1. Mr. Ratan Singh Rathore, Advocate-appellant accused.
2. ShriSandeep Singh Dahiya, Additional Public Prosecutor for Govt.

::Order : Date: 15.02.2023

Application for bail on behalf of the applicant/accused under

section 439 D.P.No. Presented in the Hon'ble Sessions Court, Udaipur,

from where the case was transferred to this Court. bail application
The copy was given to the Additional Public Prosecutor. |

The facts of the case in brief are as follows that on 12.01.2023, the

applicant Aditya Sharma submitted a written report before Police Station Hiranmangrito
the effect that his friends Gauravy, Sandeep, Aryan and Khushraj would
attend classes at Tulsi Niketan located in sector four Hiranmangri. Studying in 12th
today all of them went to Tulsi Nikten School at 09.00 am and gave
pre-board exam from 9.30 am to 12.30 pm. After exam time he had breakfast time at
1.03 PM on his mobile number 8769347456 he got call from some

unknown person on mobile number 8302821317 and told him who is

Khushraj then he told him that he is his friend and with him for four years is

reading then he said what is his connection with Meenakshithen he said that
 2 (CIS No. 340/
2023) Order dated 15.02.2023

It is his brother, then he disconnected the call, after five minutes the
callcame again from the same number and told him that Khushraj's full
name is Khushraj Singh Shaktawat, no. Must have gone then he called Gaurav's

mobile and talked to Khushraj and told him that he had received a
call from Siddharth who was asking him to kill youand after some time
he reached the school where Gaurav, Sandeep and Khushraj all three
were sitting. As soon as he left, Khushraj called on the same number from his
mobile and asked what happened, then Siddharth said that Iam coming outside
the school. During this,Siddharth called again and asked Khushraj to
come to Sevashram or Cafe, then Khushraj refused, after about 10 minutes he
came out, then as soon as he came, Siddharth abused Yuvraj and
slapped him and said that now do not talk to Meenakshi. Karna and the boy sitting
behind the scooty stabbed Khushraj with a knife on his left leg with the
intention of kiling him, which caused commotion on the spot, proved
Arth and that boy ran away from the scooty, then we took Khushraj to the
schooland from there took him to Kanak Hospital for treatment,
but his relatives also came. When asked about the boy sitting behind the
scooty, his name is Praveen. On Siddharth, Praveen, who came with him, attacked
Khushraj Singh with a knife with the intention of killing him...etc.
On the above written report, police station Hiranmangri started research by

registering first information report number 18/ 2023 in crime section 307, 34
Bhadas, which is currently Jair research.

During the arguments, learned counsel for the applicant-accused argues

that the applicant-accused is innocent, he has not assaulted the injured. It is clear
from the perusal of the FIR that the applicant is not accused of assaulting the
injured. According to the FIR, the assault and incident with the injured was done
by a boy named Praveen. There is no such evidence on the research file that the applicant
was involved in the said incident in any way. The name of the applicant has been marked
by other boys only because of doubt and old differences. co-accused Praveen
 3 (CIS No. 340/2023)
Order dated 15.02.2023

Is on bail from the court. Injury to the leg of the victim does not
come within the definition of section 307 Bhadas. The story has been deliberately

exaggerated to make the case non-bailable. Prima facie the case is not made out

under Section 307 Bhadas, which is clear from the report of the Medical Jurist, the applicant

accused is a young youth, there is a possibility of time being taken in

the disposalof the case. In the light of the order dated 11.07.22 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Satyendra Kumar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Case No. Special

Live Petition No. 5191 / 2021,the accused was now granted bail by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the said order after completion of the investigation. It is in the
interest of justice to give the benefit of bail to the accused as per the guidelines and
following the guidelines ordered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tiwari
Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh. The applicant - the accused is continuously being detained in custody
since 13.02.23, there is a possibility of time being taken in the trial and investigation

of the case. Hence requested to grant the benefit of bail to the applicant.

On the contrary, the learned Public Prosecutor filed the bail application
Opposing, requested to dismiss the application.
Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused
the research papers. In the case, the applicant/accused is accused
of Section 307.326 read with Section 34 Bhadas. The criminal

record of the applicant accused is attached on the file, according to which

a total of 01 criminal case has been registered against the applicant
accused. But the bail of co-accused Praveen of the case has been

accepted by the court on 09.02.23.Honorable Rajasthan High

gCourt Jodhpur's judicial decision SB Criminal Bell Application No.
861 /21 Anwan Khet Singh and others vs. State of Rajasthan, in the decision

dated 25.01.2021, Honorable Rajasthan High Court has propounded

the principle that "Where the bail of the same co-accused
in similar circumstances has been accepted, other accused should also be given
the benefit of bail unless there are exceptional circumstances".
 4 (CIS No. 340/2023)
Order dated 15.02.2023

It has been told and trialof the case is definitely likely to take time.

ln sucha situation,without expressing any comment on the merits of the

case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is found justified to give
the benefit of bail to the applicant-accused.

Therefore, under the first bail application presented by the applicant

accused Siddharth, section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is accepted

and ordered that if the applicant-accused submits a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- to

the satisfaction of the subordinate court and 25-25 If he submits

twosureties of Rs. 1000 each and gets them attested, then he should
be released on bail in this case. Color photograph should be pasted on the bail
bond.

(Vikram Singh )
Additional Sessions Judge, Sr. No.3, Udaipur

The order was pronounced today in writing on 15.02.2023.

(Vikram Singh )
Additional Sessions Judge, Cum No. 3, Udaipur