Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Narendra Singh Dhaddha, J.
Buddha Ram & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13929/2021
Decided On : 18-10-2021
BAIL - WILDLIFE PROTECTION - The court granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioners accused under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, considering their prolonged detention and the potential delay in trial, without commenting on the case's merits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were arrested in connection with an FIR for offenses under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, and claimed to be falsely implicated.
Finding of the Court:
The court found it just to grant bail, considering the circumstances of prolonged detention and the likelihood of a lengthy trial.
Issues: Whether the petitioners should be granted bail despite the opposition from the Public Prosecutor.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the right to a fair trial, allowing bail when detention is prolonged and trial delays are anticipated.
Result: The bail application was allowed, and the petitioners were ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties.
JUDGMENT
1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR/ Book No. 32 Page No. 55 dated 28.09.2021 Registered at Police Station Regional Forest Office, Balotra, District Barmer for the offence(s) under Sections 9 and 51 of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are behind the bars since long and conclusion of trial may take long time.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
4. Considering the contentions put-forth by the counsel for the petitioners and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail.
5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners Buddha Ram S/o Amra Ram and Prema Ram S/o Chaina Ram shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
AI
The court established that prolonged detention without trial can justify the granting of bail, emphasizing the balance between personal liberty and the seriousness of the charges.
Grant of bail based on false implication and lack of substantial recovery of wildlife articles.
The court has the discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rigors of Section 51B(2)(b) of the Wildlife (Protection) (Assam Amendment) Act, 2009 applied, making the offence non-bailable and subject ....
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
