The court emphasized that the absence of substantial evidence and the prolonged custody of the petitioner justified the grant of bail, notwithstanding the serious nature of the allegations.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 120B - Bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS - Petitioner arrested in connection with serious offences - Co-accused have been granted bail - Complainant's statements turned hostile - No evidence linking petitioner to crime - Trial likely to be prolonged - Court finds substantial grounds for bail. (Paras 1-11)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail - The court must assess the gravity of the offence and the evidence available, but also consider the length of custody and the potential for undue delay in trial. (Paras 7, 10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested for alleged involvement in a murder and conspiracy, but claims innocence, asserting no evidence links him to the crime, and the main witness has turned hostile. (Paras 1-5)

Findings of Court:
The court acknowledges the absence of evidence against the petitioner and the fact that co-accused have been granted bail, leading to the conclusion that detention is unnecessary given the circumstances. (Paras 9-11)

Issues: The main issues addressed include the lack of evidence against the petitioner and the implications of co-accused being granted bail. (Paras 2, 10)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the lack of evidence and the prolonged custody of the petitioner warranted the grant of bail, emphasizing that the seriousness of allegations must be balanced against the evidence presented. (Paras 7, 10)

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.346/2022 registered at Police Station Raipur, District Pali, for offences under Sections 302 and 120B of the IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Ashok Kumar @ Ashu @ Ashuram (S. B . Cr. Misc. B ail Application No.3772/2024); Hadman Ram @ B andiya (S. B . Cr. Misc. B ail Application No.5145/2024) and B hajanlal (S. B . Cr. Misc. B ail Application No.12877/2024) have already been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 06.09.2024 and 14.01.2025 respectively. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail.

3. Learned counsel further submitted that the statements of the complainant- Sua Kathat (PW-2) have already been recorded before the competent criminal court. The complainant Sua Kathat (PW-2), in his Court statements, has not supported the prosecution story and has turned hostile.

4. Learned counsel further contended that in the present case, the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the statements of the co-accused Ashok Kumar @ Ashu @ Ashuram who has already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel submitted that there is no evidence available on record so as to link the petitioner with the alleged crime.

5. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and therefore, looking to the seriousness of allegation against the petitioner, he does not deserves to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in position to refute the fact that the above named co-accused have already been enlarged on bail.

7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

8. The order dated 06.02.2024 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court while granting bail to the co-accused Ashok Kumar @Ashu @ Ashuram is reproduced herein below for ready reference:

“1. The applicant is under arrested in connection with crime registered pursuant to F.I.R. Number 346/2022 of Police Station Raipur District Pali in respect of offence punishable under section(s) 307, 302, 120- B of the IPC. They have approached this Court by way of this application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

( Section 483 of BNSS ).

2. Before I proceed to examine the rival contentions in connection with the questions of bail it would be appropriate to briefly state the facts of the present case which are that on 06.09.2022, at around 11:00 PM, complainant and his companions were standing on a road with a vehicle, monitoring illegal liquor transportation because complainant had government liquor contracts in that area. After some time, an Isuzu vehicle passed by in a dangerous manner, prompting the complainant and his companions to follow it. Further ahead, the Isuzu vehicle stopped and two individuals armed with weapons got out. Omprakash, the driver of the complainant's vehicle also stepped out. During this time, the individuals from the Isuzu vehicle fired bullets that hit Omprakash, after which the assailants fled towards the forest. The complainant and his companions can identify the accused if they see them. Upon inspecting the Isuzu vehicle, it was discovered that it was filled with contraband poppy straw.

Unfortunately, Omprakash later died during treatment.

3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner vehemently urged that petitioners are innocent persons and a false case has been foisted against him; that entire allegations so leveled by the police against the petitioners are totally false and baseless; that nothing

Click Here to Read the rest of this document