Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Devendra Kachhawaha, J.
Vibhuti – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 3662 of 2022
Decided On : 16-03-2022
Bail - Proviso of Section 437 Cr.P.C. - Liberal view for women - Summary: The court granted bail to the petitioner, a woman in judicial custody, considering the proviso of Section 437 Cr.P.C. which emphasizes a liberal view for women while considering bail prayer, along with the fact that co-accused persons had been granted bail and the trial was expected to take a long time.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. as she was in judicial custody for offences under Sections 420, 406, and 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 petitioner considering the proviso of Section 437 Cr.P.C., the fact that co-accused persons had been granted bail, and the expected lengthy trial.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The proviso of Section 437 Cr.P.C. emphasizes a liberal view for women while considering bail prayer, and the expected lengthy trial influenced the court's decision to grant bail to the petitioner.
Final Decision: The second bail application of the petitioner was allowed, and she was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing the specified bonds.
JUDGMENT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J. - The present second 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.278/2019, Police Station Sadar Kotwali, District Banswara, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard and considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that at the time of rejection of first bail application (No.16819/2021) by this Court, vide order dated 05.01.2022, liberty was granted to file a fresh bail application after filing of the charge-sheet; thereafter, charge- sheet has been filed; offences are triable by Magistrate; petitioner is a lady; benefit of bail has been granted to co-accused persons, viz., Dinesh, Deepak, Kishan, Rameshchandra and Dinesh; petitioner is behind the bars since 01.09.2021; and trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may also be granted to the petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner but does not controvert the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the facts that offences are triable by the First Class Magistrate; charge-sheet has been filed; benefit of bail has been granted by co-ordinate Bench of this Court to co-accused persons, viz., Dinesh, Deepak & Kishan vide order dated 09.03.2022 (Bail application No.3186/2022) and Rameshchandra & Dinesh vide order dated 04.03.2022 (Bail application No.2944/2022); the proviso of Section 437 Cr.P.C. is itself very clear that liberal view should be adopted for women while considering bail prayer; 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.
6. Consequently, the second bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the petitioner, Vibhuti W/o Deepak Gehlot, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.278/2019, Police Station Sadar Kotwali, District Banswara, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided she furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each (one shall be a local surety) 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 proviso of Section 437 Cr.P.C. emphasizes a liberal view for women while considering bail prayer.
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 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 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 triability of the offences, previous bail grants to co-accused persons, and the expected delay in further investigation and trial as key factors in granting bail to the accus....
The court considered the lack of witness support, the petitioner's time in custody, and the expectation of a lengthy trial in granting bail to the accused-petitioner.
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 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.
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
