Bail may be granted when the accused's circumstances are similar to those of a co-accused already released on bail, and no risks are demonstrated by the prosecution.

Headnote:(A) Arms Act - Sections 3/25, 3/25(6), 5/25 - Bail application under Section 483 of BNSS - Petitioner arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.633/2024 for offences under the Arms Act - Co-accused previously granted bail - Court finds no distinguishable factors between cases - Prosecution failed to show apprehension of influencing witnesses or fleeing from justice. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Judicial custody - The court considers the length of the trial and the circumstances of the case in deciding on bail applications. (Paras 3-5)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner arrested in connection with offences under the Arms Act, claims similarity with co-accused already granted bail, and argues that the trial will take a long time. (Paras 3-4)

Findings of Court:
The court finds no distinguishable factors and no apprehension of influencing witnesses; thus, bail is granted. (Paras 5-6)

Issues: Whether the petitioner’s case is distinguishable from that of the co-accused and the implications for bail. (Paras 3-5)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes that similarity in circumstances warrants bail, especially when prosecution fails to demonstrate a risk of influencing witnesses or fleeing. (Paras 5-6)

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.633/2024 registered at Police Station Sukher, District Udaipur for the offences under Sections 3/25 , 3/25(6) & 5/25 of Arms Act and Section 111 of BNS.

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 co- accused Tosif (S. B . Criminal Miscellaneous B ail Application No.394/2025) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2025. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

4. Per Contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the above name co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the material prosecution witnesses or fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Aijaz S/o Shri Usmaan arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.633/2024 registered at Police Station Sukher, District Udaipur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

7. 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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document