Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.
Vikram @ Bhuriya - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 6559 of 2021
Decided On : 02-12-2021
BAIL - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - The court granted bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to the petitioner, finding his case identical to that of a co-accused who had previously been granted bail. The court emphasized the importance of equal treatment in similar cases and the lengthy duration of the trial process, leading to the decision to allow bail under specified conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Vikram @ Bhuriya, is in custody for serious offences under various sections of the IPC, including murder and robbery, as per F.I.R. No.202/2014. His first bail application was rejected, but a charge-sheet has since been filed.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that the petitioner’s case is not distinguishable from that of a co-accused who was granted bail. The Public Prosecutor could not provide a valid distinction between the two cases.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the circumstances of his case and the precedent set by the co-accused being granted bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle of parity in bail applications, determining that similar cases should be treated alike, especially when the circumstances are comparable and the trial is expected to be lengthy.
Result: The court allowed the second bail application, ordering the release of the petitioner on bail with specific conditions regarding personal bonds and sureties.
JUDGMENT
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.202/2014, Police Station Chanderia, District Chittorgarh for the offences under Sections 302, 394, 396, 460, 412, 342 and 120-B of IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after rejection of the first bail application by this Court on 21.01.2020, the charge-sheet in the case has been filed. He further submits that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from the co-accused Dinesh who has been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.03.2017. The conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time. He, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application but he is unable to distinguish the case of the present petitioner vis-a-vis the case of the co-accused person who has been enlarged on bail.
5. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that case of the petitioner is identical to the co-accused who has been enlarged on bail by this Court, this Court deems it just and proper to release the petitioner on bail.
6. Consequently, the present second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner ? Vikram @ Bhuriya S/o Moti Lal Bavri arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 202/2014, Police Station Chanderia, District Chittorgarh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees : Twenty Five Thousand Only) 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 principle of parity in bail applications mandates that similarly situated accused persons should be treated equally, particularly when the prosecution fails to distinguish their cases.
The decision highlighted the principle of granting bail based on the similarity of the case with a co-accused who had been enlarged on bail, and the importance of considering the facts and circumstan....
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, including the stage of the trial and the likelihood of a prolonged trial.
The peculiar circumstances prevailing in the country due to the pandemic of COVID-19 influenced the Court's decision to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The court's decision was influenced by the similarity of the petitioner's case to the co-accused who had been granted bail and the absence of recovery of contraband from the petitioner's possession, ....
The decision to grant bail was based on the similarity of the petitioner's case to that of the co-accused who had already been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of the Court.
The principle of parity in bail applications mandates that similarly situated accused should be treated equally unless there are significant differences in their cases.
The court's decision to grant bail to the accused-petitioners was influenced by the circumstances of the case, including the rejection of the first bail applications, the filing of the charge-sheet, ....
The principle of parity in bail applications mandates that if a co-accused is granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to other accused in the same case.
The Court considered the similarity of the petitioner's case to the co-accused who had been enlarged on bail and the exceptional circumstances due to the COVID-19 pandemic in granting bail under Sect....
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
