Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
PUSHKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.50/2021 registered at Police Station Sallopat, Dist. Banswara, for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 302 of IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Mahesh Prajapat (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous III Bail Application No.1124/2025) has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.01.2025. The order dated 24.01.2025 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court while enlarging the co-accused Mahesh Prajapat on bail is reproduced herein below for ready reference:
“1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused- petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
| S.No. | Particulars of the Case | |
| 1. | FIR Number | 50/2021 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Sallopath |
| 3. | District | Banswara |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Under Sections 302 of IPC and 3/25 of Arms Act |
| 5. | Offences added, if any | Under Sections 120B of IPC and 5/25 of Arms Act |
| 6. | Date | |
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and indefinite detention without trial is impermissible, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution takes precedence over statutory restrictions on bail, especially when the accused has been in custody for an unreasonable period.
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 decision highlighted the principle of granting bail based on the similarity of the case with a co-accused who had been enlarged on bail, and the importance of considering the facts and circumstan....
The principle of parity in bail applications mandates that similarly situated accused persons should be treated equally, particularly when the prosecution fails to distinguish their cases.
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of Section 439 Cr.P.C., considering the custody period, lack of specific role attributed to the petitioners, and the assurance given by their....
Bail should not be denied without specific evidence against the accused, and the absence of prior animosity supports the case for bail.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when the accused is in custody for an extended period, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses, especially when a co-accused has been granted ba....
Bail granted due to lack of evidence from material witnesses and absence of criminal antecedents, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of witness examination can justify bail under the NDPS Act, overriding statutory restrictions.
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
