Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Manoj Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
1.This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.188/2022 registered at Police Station Bengu, District Chittorgarh for offences under Sections 302 & 201 of IPC .
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation against the present petitioner is that he along with co-accused Rajendra Prasad killed one Smt. Rekha. The dead body of Smt. Rekha had recovered on 06.07.2022 in burnt condition in the forest of Hari Badaliya. Learned counsel vehemently submitted that there is no eye witness of the alleged incident. The entire case of the prosecution is based only on the circumstantial evidence. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution the deceased was last seen in the company of present petitioner by the Saudan Singh (PW- 6), Ishwar Singh (PW-18) and Bhagwan Singh (PW-19). It is contended that the statements of the Saudan Singh (PW-6), Ishwar Singh (PW-18) and Bhagwan Singh (PW-19) have already been recorded before the competent Criminal
The absence of eyewitness testimony and hostile witnesses justifies granting bail, particularly in cases with circumstantial evidence and no clear motive.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence of motive and prolonged judicial custody, emphasizing the right to timely trial.
Bail granted due to lack of direct evidence and prolonged judicial custody, emphasizing that CDRs cannot solely support a conviction.
Bail granted due to lack of evidence and co-accused released.
The presumption of innocence prevails at the pre-conviction stage, necessitating bail when evidence is insufficient to justify continued custody.
The absence of direct evidence of mens rea precludes liability for abetment of suicide, justifying bail for the accused.
Bail can be granted when investigation is complete and co-accused have received bail, despite serious allegations.
The court ruled that lack of evidence for intent to instigate suicide justifies granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
A petitioner cannot be denied bail solely based on co-accused statements when not named in the FIR and lacking direct evidence.
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.
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
