Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J.
Kanahaiya Lal @ Ravi - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12824, 12825 of 2021
Decided On : 20-10-2021
BAIL - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - The court granted bail to the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C., considering the filing of the charge-sheet, the grant of bail to co-accused, and the prolonged trial duration. The court emphasized the need for a fair assessment of the circumstances surrounding the case without delving into the merits of the allegations.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners are in judicial custody related to F.I.R. No.107/2020 for serious offences under the IPC. They claimed false implication and noted that co-accused had been granted bail.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the filing of the charge-sheet, the grant of bail to co-accused, and the anticipated lengthy trial, leading to the conclusion that the petitioners should also be granted bail.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail considering the circumstances of the case and the status of co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the grant of bail is justified when the charge-sheet is filed, co-accused have been granted bail, and the trial is expected to take a long time, without prejudicing the merits of the case.
Result: The bail applications of the petitioners were allowed, subject to the condition of furnishing personal and surety bonds.
JUDGMENT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J. - The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who are in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.107/2020, Police Station Bhadsauda, District Chittorgarh, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 394, 398 and 458/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case; charge-sheet has been filed; petitioners are behind the bars since 04.03.2021; benefit of bail has been granted to co-accused persons, Kanhaiya Lal @ Kanha and Akash @ Kamaldweep; as per rejection order itself, no other case has been registered against the petitioner, Krishnpal Singh @ Abhishek Singh; 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.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and stated that eight other cases have been registered against Kanahaiya Lal @ Ravi.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the facts that charge-sheet has been filed; benefit of bail has been granted to co-accused Kanhaiya Lal @ Kanha by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.10.2021 (Bail Application No.13642/2021) and to co-accused Akash @ Kamaldweep by this Court vide order dated 14.12.2020 (Bail Application No.12449/2021); 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.
6. Consequently, the bail applications are allowed. It is ordered that the petitioners - Kanahaiya Lal @ Ravi S/o Shankar Lal (Bail Application No.12825/2021) and Krishnpal Singh @ Abhishek Singh S/o Shankar Lal (Bail Application No.12824/2021) both arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.107/2020, Police Station Bhadsauda, District Chittorgarh, 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 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 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 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 the grant of bail can be influenced by the duration of custody, the nature of the offences, and the treatment of co-accused in similar circumstances.
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 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 established that bail can be granted based on the absence of injuries, the filing of a charge-sheet, and the duration of custody, reinforcing the principle that pre-trial detention should n....
Bail can be granted when the accused is in judicial custody, charges are filed, and co-accused have received similar relief.
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
