Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Satya NaraIn Vs. State of Rajasthan

Satya Narain vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Oct 16, 1986
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/766664

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Appl. No. 2654 of 1986
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code - Section 306 and Criminal Procedure Code--Bail--Conflicting statements of witnesses regarding incidence of death--Nothing against accused S in earlier statements of witnesses recorded Under Section 161--Held, accused S deserves to be enlarged on bail.;Bail Granted - - 3. In view of the conflicting stat...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Satya Narain

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Cases Referred
Hajari Lal and Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan
Reported In
1987WLN(UC)144

Excerpt

penal code - section 306 and criminal procedure code--bail--conflicting statements of witnesses regarding incidence of death--nothing against accused s in earlier statements of witnesses recorded under section 161--held, accused s deserves to be enlarged on bail.;bail granted - - 3. in view of the conflicting statements, i am of the opinion that the petitioner satya narain deserves to be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of rs, 5,000/- with one surity in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.inder sen israni, j.1. heard learned counsel for the parties. i have perused the challan papers. statement of ashok singh, nawalkishore, shanker, damodar, ramgopal, indralal and vinod, were recorded under section. 174 cr.pc on 3-9-86, on the date of occurrence. all these witnesses stated that deceased nirmala committed suicide. no allegation of ill treat-mentor beating was made by either of the above named witnesses against the petitioner who is husband of the deceased lady. in the challan filed in the court, the names of ashok singh and damodar prasad, have not been cited in the list of witnesses. in the statement recorded under section 161, cr. pc. nawal kishore and shankarlal have stated that the petitioner used to ill treat his wife. few other witnesses who have been examined under section 161, cr. pc have also stated the same. learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the case of hajari lal and ors. v. the state of rajasthan 1985 rlr 956 in which it was observed that when nothing was stated against the accused petitioner in earlier statements of witnesses recorded under section 161 cr. pc and same witnesses speak against the accused in statements recorded again after 5 days implicating the accused persons for abeting deceased lady to be quashed in revision.2. in this case also there is no allegation of any abetment against the petitioner in several statements recorded under section 174 cr. pc. two of those witnesses have made allegation against the accused petitioner in their statements recorded under section 161 cr. pc after lapse of more than 10 days.3. in view of the conflicting statements, i am of the opinion that the petitioner satya narain deserves to be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of rs, 5,000/- with one surity in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

Full Judgment

Inder Sen Israni, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. I have perused the challan papers. Statement of Ashok Singh, Nawalkishore, Shanker, Damodar, Ramgopal, Indralal and Vinod, were recorded under Section. 174 Cr.PC on 3-9-86, on the date of occurrence. All these witnesses stated that deceased Nirmala committed suicide. No allegation of ill treat-mentor beating was made by either of the above named witnesses against the petitioner who is husband of the deceased lady. In the challan filed in the court, the names of Ashok Singh and Damodar Prasad, have not been cited in the list of witnesses. In the statement recorded Under Section 161, Cr. PC. Nawal Kishore and Shankarlal have stated that the petitioner used to ill treat his wife. Few other witnesses who have been examined Under Section 161, Cr. PC have also stated the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the case of Hajari Lal and Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan 1985 RLR 956 in which it was observed that when nothing was stated against the accused petitioner in earlier statements of witnesses recorded Under Section 161 Cr. PC and same witnesses speak against the accused in statements recorded again after 5 days implicating the accused persons for abeting deceased lady to be quashed in revision.

2. In this case also there is no allegation of any abetment against the petitioner in several statements recorded Under Section 174 Cr. PC. Two of those witnesses have made allegation against the accused petitioner in their statements recorded under section 161 Cr. PC after lapse of more than 10 days.

3. In view of the conflicting statements, I am of the opinion that the petitioner Satya Narain deserves to be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs, 5,000/- with one surity in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial