HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
AMIT SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 1419 / 2025
(A) Bail Applications - Section 483 of BNSS - The petitioners sought bail after being arrested for serious offences including 304(2) and 326(g) of BNS. The court noted that the allegations were serious but the injuries were simple in nature, and the trial would take a long time. (Paras 1, 5, 6, 8)
(B) Judicial Custody - The court found no apprehension of the petitioners influencing witnesses or fleeing, thus granting bail. (Paras 6, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners were arrested in connection with a violent incident on 31.10.2024, leading to injuries to both parties involved. The petitioners argued for bail based on the lengthy trial process and lack of serious allegations.
Findings of Court:
The court found the injuries inflicted were simple and that the trial would not conclude soon, allowing bail.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners should be granted bail considering the nature of the allegations and their custody status.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the seriousness of allegations must be weighed against the nature of injuries and the length of the trial process, allowing bail when no risk of influencing witnesses was present.
Result: Bail applications allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arrested in connection with (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners are in judicial custody (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. the nature of allegations (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. these bail applications under (Para 8 , 9) |
Order :
1. These applications for bail under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.386/2024 registered at Police Station Makrana, District Deedwana-Kuchaman for the offences under Sections 189(2), 331(6), 304(2), 326(g), 324(4) & 109(2) of BNS.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the co- accused persons namely Shakti Singh (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.352/2025), Krishan Pal @ Kuldeep Singh (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.1259/2025) and Shivraj Singh (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.1260/2025) have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2025. Learned counsel further submitted that the case of the present petitioners is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody; the challan against the present petitioners has already been filed before the competent Criminal Court and 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 have vehemently opposed the bail applications. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in the alleged incident which occurred on 31.10.2024, the petitioners had brutally beaten the injured persons without there being any provocation and, therefore, looking to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present petitioners, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the order dated 29.01.2025 passed by this Court. The order dated 29.01.2025 is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-
“These applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.386/2024, registered at Police Station Makrana, District Deedwana-Kuchaman, for offences under Sections 189(2), 331(6), 326(g), 115(2), 324(4) and 117(2) of BNS.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had no motive to commit the alleged crime. Learned counsel submitted that on 31.10.2024, a free fight took place between the parties wherein the injuries have been received by the complainant party as well as by the accused persons. Learned counsel submitted that for the alleged incident which occurred on 31.10.2024, a cross FIR No.387/2024 has been lodged at P.S. Makrana, District Deedwana-Kuchaman against the complainant party wherein the police after making a thorough investigation has prima facie found the allegations levelled against the members of the complainant party to be correct.
Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned counsels for the complainant submitted that in the alleged incident which occurred on 31.10.2024, the petitioners had brutally beaten the injured persons without there being any provocation and looking to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present petitioners, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar.Perused the material available on record.
This Court looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the present p
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 applications granted based on parity with co-accused and consideration of lengthy trial, without prejudice to trial court's future decisions.
Bail may be granted when injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, investigation is concluded, and no risk of influencing witnesses is present.
The court granted bail to petitioners based on similar circumstances to co-accused previously granted bail, emphasizing no opinion on case merits.
Bail can be granted based on parity with co-accused, provided there is no risk of the accused influencing witnesses or fleeing justice.
Bail can be granted even for serious allegations if the injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, and the investigation is complete.
The court emphasized that when co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioners, considering the lengthy trial duration.
Bail can be granted when allegations involve simple injuries, no criminal history exists, and trial duration 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 may be granted if the accused is in judicial custody, the trial will take a long time, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.