Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
RAJENDRA PRASAD @ JEETU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.609/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Sri Ganganagar, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 55, 61(2)(a) of BNS.
2. As per the prosecution, the petitioner- Rajendra Prasad @ Jeetu is member of a gang formed by co-accused persons Anmol Bishnoi, Arjun Bishnoi, Amit @ Jack Pandit which is involved in extorting money by putting people under the threat of death. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, in furtherance of the conspiracy hatched by co-accused persons to kill the complainant- Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Pandit conducted recce’ of his house and procured weapons for this purpose. As per the prosecution, the petitioner was also provided a GPS device by the co-accused to conduct the said recce’.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the only allegation against t
The court denied bail due to the gravity of the charges and sufficient evidence linking the petitioner to a conspiracy to commit murder.
Bail may be granted when the sole allegation is peripheral and there is no evidence of conspiracy or intent to commit the crime.
The absence of eyewitness testimony and hostile witnesses justifies granting bail, particularly in cases with circumstantial evidence and no clear motive.
Bail can be granted based on the nature of allegations, duration of custody, and acceptance of co-accused's bail applications, without commenting on case merits.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged crime, emphasizing the need for substantial proof in drug-related cases.
The court granted bail due to lack of evidence against the petitioner and the prior bail granted to co-accused, emphasizing the importance of these factors in bail considerations.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence of motive and prolonged judicial custody, emphasizing the right to timely trial.
The absence of direct evidence against the petitioner and the lengthy trial process justified the granting of bail.
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
