Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J.
Abhishek - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12872, 13360, of 2021
Decided On : 22-10-2021
[BAIL] - [CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] - The court granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioners, considering their prolonged custody since 31.08.2021, the absence of pending investigations or recoveries against them, and the anticipated delay in trial. The decision emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, leading to the conclusion that the bail applications were justified.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, Abhishek and Vikas, were in judicial custody since 31.08.2021, charged under F.I.R. No.277/2021 for offences under Sections 392, 394, and 34 of the IPC. They claimed false implication and sought bail, arguing that no further investigation was pending.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the petitioners' lengthy custody, lack of pending investigations, and the expected delay in trial. It concluded that these factors warranted the acceptance of the bail applications without commenting on the case's merits.
Issues: Whether the petitioners should be granted bail considering their prolonged custody and the status of the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle that prolonged detention without trial, coupled with no pending investigations, justifies the grant of bail, emphasizing the right to personal liberty.
Result: The bail applications were allowed, and the petitioners were ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties.
JUDGMENT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J
Bail Application No.13360/2021:-
2. 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.277/2021, Police Station Hiranmagri, District Udaipur, registered for the offences punishable under Section 394/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Bail Application No.12872/2021:-
3. 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.277/2021, Police Station Hiranmagri, District Udaipur, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 392, 394 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Bail Application Nos. 13360/2021 & 12872/2021:-
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that petitioners have been falsely been implicated in this case; petitioners are behind the bars since 31.08.2021; no investigation or recovery is pending against the petitioners; and trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that the benefit of bail may also be granted to the petitioners.
6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has fervently and vehemently opposed the bail applications and stated that Rs.6,000/- have been recovered from accused-petitioner, Abhishek & Rs.4,500/- have been recovered from accused-petitioner, Vikas and one another case has been registered against accused-petitioner, Vikas.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the custody period of the accused-petitioners; accused-petitioners are behind the bars since 31.08.2021; no investigation or recovery is pending against the petitioners; 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 applications filed by the petitioners deserve to be accepted.
8. Consequently, the bail applications are allowed. It is ordered that the petitioners - Abhishek S/o Rameshchandra (Bail Application No.13360/2021) and Vikas S/o Bhagwati Lal, (Bail Application No.12872/2021) both arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.277/2021, Police Station Hiranmagri, District Udaipur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each 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 judicial custody without pending investigations can lead to the granting of bail, reinforcing the presumption of innocence and the right to personal liberty.
The court established that prolonged judicial custody without trial, along with the filing of a charge-sheet, can justify the granting of bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
The court established that bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. when the charge-sheet is filed, co-accused have been granted bail, and the trial is likely to be prolonged.
The court established that the presumption of innocence and the circumstances surrounding the case, including the status of co-accused and the delay in trial, are critical in deciding bail applicatio....
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 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 and the expected lengthy duration of further investigation and trial as grounds for 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.
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
