Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Mr. Justice Kuldeep Mathur, J
Arman @ Abbu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
Order :
1. The present application for bail under Section 483 of BNS S (439 of Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.30/2025 registered at Police Station Sursagar, Jodhpur City-West, for offences under Sections 115(2) , 126(2) , 110 and 309(6)/3(5) of BNS .
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the specific allegation of inflicting sharp injuries upon the injured – Omchand Prajapat with a sharp weapon (knife) has been levelled against the co-accused Firoz. Learned counsel further submitted that no specific overt act has been attributed to the petitioner.
4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; no recovery is pending against the present petitioner and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to conclude, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that in the
Bail may be granted when specific allegations against the petitioner are weak, recovery is not pending, and trial duration is expected to be lengthy.
Bail may be granted when no specific overt act is attributed to the accused and no recovery is pending, despite serious allegations.
The court grants bail due to lack of specific allegations against the petitioner and recognizes the lengthy trial process, emphasizing the importance of judicial fairness.
The court granted bail based on the completion of the investigation and the simple nature of injuries, finding no risk of witness tampering or flight.
The court granted bail based on the lack of substantial evidence against the petitioners and the nature of the allegations, emphasizing the importance of judicial discretion in bail applications.
The absence of eye-witnesses and reliance on conjecture justified the granting of bail, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
The court granted bail based on CCTV evidence showing the petitioner was not armed during the incident, emphasizing that presence alone does not imply complicity in the crime.
Bail can be granted even for serious allegations if the injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, and the investigation is complete.
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
