news details |
|
|
| Court rejects bail of four dacoits | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Feb 4: 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Jammu Rajinder Sapru has rejected the bail application of four dacoits arrested in a robbery case registered at Police Station Arnia.
As per police sources, on December 27 last year, some dacoits after proper recee hatched a criminal conspiracy and attacked a petrol pump employee Kaku Ram with sharp edged weapons and snatched Rs 2.31 lakhs from him and fled away. Soon after the incident, a case under FIR number 93/2021 under Sections 120 B, 397 and 323 IPC and 4/25 Arms Act was lodged at Police Station Arnia and investigation was set into motion.
The 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Jammu observed that in the instant case as already stated the nature of accusation against applicants/accused is serious and the punishment prescribed for the offence is also severe. The likelihood of the applicants/accused jumping the bail, intimidating and influencing the witnesses and getting encouraged to commit similar crimes in the society at this stage cannot be ruled out.
The accused persons are alleged to have been committed the horrendous crime in the broad day light which surely must have created doubts in the minds of people regarding the might of the State in maintaining the law and order in the society. It is the duty of the courts to remove such apprehensions, doubts and fears from the minds of the common people. In other words, courts have the bounded duty to reinforce the faith of people in the administration of justice and criminal justice system and therefore, a balance is required to be struck between the right of personal liberty of applicants with the interests of society at large, the judge observed.
While rejecting the bail applications of Gurnam Singh, Jagandeep Singh, Rahul and Rahul Kumar, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Jammu observed that taking note of the modus operandi adopted by the applicants/accused persons in committing the alleged crime, impact of the crime on the psyche of the members of society in general, more particularly when some of the accused persons are still at large and recovery of a large part of money is yet to be effected, this court is of the considered opinion that the right of personal liberty of the accused persons at this stage has to yield to the larger interests of the society. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
