Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Mangilal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1197 of 2022
Decided On : 05-04-2022
Bail Application - Grant of Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. - The court granted bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, including the petitioner being behind bars for a significant period and the injured witness not appearing before the trial court for his statement.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. after being arrested in connection with FIR No. 8/2020 for offences under Sections 143, 341 & 323 of IPC. The first bail application was rejected with the liberty to file afresh after recording the statement of Subhash Chandra.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, deemed it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. considering the petitioner's prolonged detention and the injured witness not appearing before the trial court for his statement.
Issues: The issues involved the grant of bail to the accused petitioner, considering the circumstances of the case and the non-appearance of the injured witness for his statement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the petitioner's prolonged detention and the injured witness not appearing before the trial court for his statement, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Final Decision: The second bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. was allowed, and the accused petitioner was directed to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and providing sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - This is the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 8/2020 of Police Station Chakhu, District Jodhpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341 & 323 of IPC. The first bail application was rejected on 25.11.2021 with the liberty to file afresh after recording the statement of Subhash Chandra.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after deciding the first bail application of the petitioner, the injured Subhash Chandra did not appeared for his statement. Counsel further submits that there are cross cases between both the parties. Challan of the case has already been presented and no specific role has been assigned to the petitioner as well as no recovery was made from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is behind the bars since 15.07.2020. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application.
4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner is behind the bars from 15.07.2020 and despite service upon injured Shubhash Chandra, he did not appear before the trial Court for his statement, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
5. accordingly, the second bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Mangilal S/o Khanuram Vishnoi, shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.8/2020 of Police Station Chakhu, District Jodhpur, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
The court may grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, including the petitioner's detention and the non-appearance of a key witness, with....
The court established that delays in filing an FIR and the absence of explanations can be critical factors in determining bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The court has the discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court established that prolonged custody without trial can warrant the granting of bail, particularly when similar accused have been released, emphasizing the importance of the right to liberty.
The court has the discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court established that bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. when the trial is likely to be prolonged, and the accused is not a flight risk.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
