HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Devendra Kachhawaha, J.
Suresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4407 of 2022
Decided On : 25-04-2022
Bail Application - Prevention of Corruption Act - The court granted bail to the accused-petitioner based on the facts that the offences were triable by the First Class Magistrate, the accused had been in incarceration for more than one month, no investigation was pending against the accused, and the trial would take a long time.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with F.I.R. No.97/2022, for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, granted bail to the accused-petitioner based on the circumstances of the case.
Issues: The issues involved the grant of bail to the accused-petitioner who was in judicial custody for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the triability of the offences, the duration of incarceration, the absence of pending investigations, and the expected length of the trial in granting bail to the accused-petitioner.
Final Decision: The bail application of the accused-petitioner was allowed, and it was ordered that the accused-petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.
JUDGMENT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J. - The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.97/2022, Police Station aCB Jaipur, aCB Chowki, Pali, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 7a of the Prevention of the Corruption act, 2018 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard and considered arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that offences are triable by Magistrate; petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case; petitioner is under incarceration for more than one month; even voice samples have also been taken during investigation; filing of charge-sheet will take long time; no investigation or recovery is pending against the petitioner; and trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner and stated that Rs.94,000/-have been recovered from the accused-petitioner.
5. In reply learned counsel for the petitioner stated that recovery of money has been made from the dashboard of the car of the accused-petitioner and not from physical possession of the accused-petitioner.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the facts that offences are triable by the First Class Magistrate; accused-petitioner is under incarceration for more than one month; as per factual report submitted by learned Public Prosecutor, no investigation is pending against the accused-petitioner; and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.
7. Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner, Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Magaram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.97/2022, Police Station aCB Jaipur, aCB Chowki, Pali, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/-each (one shall be a close/blood relative) to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
The court established that prolonged detention without ongoing investigation and the potential delay in trial can be grounds for granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The court established that prolonged custody and the nature of the offences can be sufficient grounds for granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The court considered the triable nature of the offences, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the expected lengthy trial as key factors in granting bail to the accused-petitioner.
The court may grant bail based on the triability of the offences by the Magistrate, filing of charge-sheet, and the expected duration of the trial.
The court considered the triable nature of the offences and the expected lengthy duration of further investigation and trial as grounds for granting bail to the accused-petitioner.
The court established that bail should be granted based on the principle of equality among co-accused and the consideration of trial duration, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The court reaffirmed that the grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. can be justified based on the nature of the offence, the status of investigations, and the anticipated duration of the trial.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the offences and the expected duration of further investigation and trial are crucial factors in considering a bail applicati....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.