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) 532

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
RAJENDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 13025 / 2024



Advocates:
Mr. Vikas Bijarnia, Mr. Ashish Kumar, Mr. Sharwan Singh Rathore, PP

Bail may be granted when injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, investigation is concluded, and no risk of influencing witnesses is present.

Headnote:(A) BNS Act - Section 483 - Bail applications filed by petitioners arrested for multiple offences including grievous injuries not dangerous to life - Petitioners argued no motive for crime, incident occurred in heat of moment, and investigation concluded - Public Prosecutor did not contest these facts. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail include judicial custody duration, conclusion of investigation, and lack of apprehension of influencing witnesses or fleeing - Court inclined to grant bail without expressing opinion on merits. (Paras 6-7)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.385/2024 for serious offences, injuries to victim deemed grievous but not life-threatening.

Findings of Court:
The court found no grounds for apprehension of flight or witness tampering, leading to the decision to grant bail.

Issues: The main issues were the nature of the injuries, the conclusion of the investigation, and the lack of motive for the alleged crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the circumstances justified bail, emphasizing that the injuries were not life-threatening and the investigation was complete.

Result: Bail applications allowed.

Order :

1. These applications for bail under Section 483 BNSS have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.385/2024 registered at Police Station Banar, District Jodhpur, for offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 333, 115(2), 110, 180, 324(6) & 307 of BNS.

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

3. Drawing attention of this Court towards the FIR and challan papers, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had no motive to commit the alleged crime. Learned counsel further submitted that the alleged incident occurred in the heat of moment. Further drawing attention of this Court towards the injury report of the injured – Rakesh Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured are though grievous in nature but not dangerous to life. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the investigation in the matter against the present petitioners has already been concluded.

4. 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 to conclude, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that though the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured persons are grievous in nature but not dangerous to life. Further, learned Public Prosecutor was not in a position to refute the fact that the investigation against the present petitioners has already been concluded.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the petitioners are in judicial custody, the investigation against them has already been concluded. This Court also prima facie finds that the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured are though grievous in nature but not dangerous to life. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of petitioners influencing the material prosecution witnesses of the case or fleeing away from justice, in case they are enlarged on bail, thus without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

7. Consequently, these bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners Rajendra S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal and Pukhraj S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. No.385/2024 registered at Police Station Banar, 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