HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Mr. Justice Kuldeep Mathur, J
Mukesh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLMB / 344 / 2025
Decided On : 06-03-2025
(A) Bail Applications - Section 483 of BNSS - Petitioners arrested under F.I.R. No.265/2024 for offences under Sections 318(4), 319(2) & 61(2)(a) of BNS - Allegations of impersonation in a medical examination for Army recruitment - Petitioners claim false implication and emphasize no recovery is pending - Investigation completed - Court grants bail without expressing opinion on merits. (Paras 1-7)
(B) Bail - Court's discretion - Bail may be granted if the accused is not wanted in any other case and the trial is likely to take a long time. (Para 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners are arrested for allegedly using a dummy candidate in an Army recruitment exam. They claim false implication and seek bail due to completed investigation and no pending recovery.
Findings of Court:
The Court allows bail applications, stating the petitioners must furnish a personal bond and sureties for their appearance during trial.
Issues: The main issues addressed include the grounds for bail and the implications of the allegations against the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasizes the importance of balancing the rights of the accused with the seriousness of the allegations, allowing bail when the investigation is complete and no further recovery is anticipated.
Result: Bail applications allowed.
ORDER :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
1. These applications for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.265/2024 registered at Police Station Ratanada, District Jodhpur for offences under Sections 318(4), 319(2) & 61(2)(a) of BNS.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the prosecution, in place of petitioner Kuldeep Singh, petitioner Mukesh appeared as a dummy candidate in the medical examination conducted by the Army at Military Hospital, Jodhpur for the post of Sepoy (Agniveer Yojna).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody; no recovery is due to be effected from them; and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail.
5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. However, he was not in position to refute the fact that the investigation against the present petitioners has already been completed.
6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.
7. Consequently, the bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners Kuldeep Singh S/o Bhagwan Singh, Mukesh S/o Anada Ram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.265/2024 registered at Police Station Ratanada, District Jodhpur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided they furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
Bail may be granted if the investigation is complete and no further recovery is pending, balancing the rights of the accused with the seriousness of the charges.
The court emphasized that when co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioners, considering the lengthy trial duration.
The court granted bail based on the absence of criminal antecedents, the co-accused's earlier bail, and the lack of pending recovery from the petitioner.
Bail may be granted when petitioners are not specifically named in the FIR and have no assigned role in the alleged crime, highlighting the discretionary nature of bail.
Bail may be granted when investigation is complete and no risk of influencing witnesses exists, emphasizing case-specific evaluation.
Bail can be granted when investigation is complete and co-accused have received bail, despite serious allegations.
The court granted bail based on the non-life-threatening nature of the injuries and the completion of the investigation, emphasizing the importance of trial duration in bail considerations.
The court emphasized that if co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioner unless distinguishable factors exist.
The absence of direct evidence of mens rea precludes liability for abetment of suicide, justifying bail for the accused.
Bail may be granted when the accused has not played an active role in the alleged crime and the trial is expected to be lengthy.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.