Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
SHRAWAN RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arrest and fir details (Para 1 , 2 , 5) |
| 2. petitioner's counsel arguments (Para 3 , 4) |
Order :
1. This application for bail under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. (old Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.96/2024 registered at Police Station Dangiawas, District Jodhpur, for offence under Section 103(1) 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 person namely Chaganaram (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12681/2024) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.11.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the case of present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused person who has already been enlarged on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the case of the petitioner is not worse than that of the co-accused- Chaganaram, therefore, the petitioner also deserve to be enlarged on bail. He submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.08.2024; inv
The court granted bail based on the principle of parity, finding no distinguishable role of the petitioner compared to a co-accused already released on bail.
The absence of eyewitnesses and lack of evidence against the accused justified the grant of bail, emphasizing the principle of preventing unnecessary detention without risk of influencing witnesses.
The absence of direct evidence and the lack of witness tampering risk justified granting bail despite serious allegations.
The court may grant bail if the nature of allegations is serious but injuries are minor, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses or fleeing.
Bail may be granted when the accused has not played an active role in the alleged crime and the trial is expected to be lengthy.
Bail granted due to lack of evidence from material witnesses and absence of criminal antecedents, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Bail can be granted based on parity with co-accused, provided there is no risk of the accused influencing witnesses or fleeing justice.
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 the non-life-threatening nature of the injuries and the completion of the investigation, emphasizing the importance of trial duration in bail considerations.
Bail may be granted when investigation is complete and no risk of influencing witnesses exists, emphasizing case-specific evaluation.
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
