SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 347

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
NARURAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 732 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. Bhagirath Ray Bishnoi, Mr. Shrawan Singh Rathore, PP, Mr. Kuldeep Sharma for complainant

Bail can be granted even for serious allegations if the injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, and the investigation is complete.

Headnote:(A) BNS Act - Sections 109(1), 309(6), 3(5), 333, 115(2) - Arms Act - Section 4/25 - Bail application - Petitioners arrested for grievous but non-life-threatening injuries inflicted on complainants - Judicial custody and completed investigation cited as grounds for bail - Court finds merit in granting bail without expressing opinion on case merits. (Paras 1-7)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail include nature of allegations and duration of custody - Seriousness of allegations does not automatically preclude bail if other factors favor it. (Paras 5-6)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.123/2024 for serious offences, but injuries inflicted are grievous yet not dangerous to life.

Findings of Court:
Bail application accepted; petitioners to be released on bail upon fulfilling bond conditions.

Issues: Whether the nature of injuries and completion of investigation warrant bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes that the seriousness of allegations must be balanced with other factors such as the duration of custody and the nature of injuries.

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.123/2024 registered at Police Station Bhojasar, District Jodhpur, for offences under Sections 109(1), 309(6), 3(5), 333, 115(2) of BNS and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.

3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the injury report of the injured persons Shrawan and Manoj, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the alleged incident, which occurred on 24.11.2024, the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured persons are though grievous in nature but the same are not dangerous to life.

4. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody; investigation against them has already been completed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application. Learned counsel Shri Kuldeep Sharma representing the complainant submitted that looking to the seriousness of allegation against the petitioners, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that in the present case, injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured persons are though grevious in nature but the same are not dangerous to life.

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 of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioners deserves to be accepted.

7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Naruram S/o Bhiyaram and (2) Shivlal S/o Jivanram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.123/2024 registered at Police Station Bhojasar, District Jodhpur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them 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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top