Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
VINOD KUMAR @ BILLA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
(FARJAND ALI, J.)
1. This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.51/2023, registered at Police Station Ghamoodwali, District Sri Ganganagar, for offences under Sections 8/15 and 25 of NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contraband (poppy husk/straw) greater than commercial quantity weighing 100 kgs. was recovered from the conscious possession of the co-accused persons namely Aslam and Vishnu. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the information supplied by the co-accused persons while they were in custody.
3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers and the statements of the Investigating Officer- Gopal Singh (PW.2), learned counsel submitted that apart from the information divulged by the co-accused persons while they were in custody, there is no other direct/circumstantial evidence is available on record indicating the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime.
4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the pet
The absence of direct evidence against a petitioner, solely relying on co-accused statements, justifies the granting of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Bail should be granted when there is no direct or circumstantial evidence against the accused, despite initial implicating statements that have been retracted.
The court granted bail due to lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and absence of criminal antecedents, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient grounds for continued detention based on the nature of the charges and comparison with a co-accused already granted bail.
Bail may be granted when the petitioner is not in possession of contraband and co-accused have been released, considering judicial custody and absence of criminal antecedents.
The court granted bail due to lack of evidence against the petitioner and the lengthy trial duration, emphasizing the need for substantial grounds to question the prosecution's case.
The principle of parity in bail applications allows for the release of accused if co-accused in similar circumstances have been granted bail.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the principle of parity with a co-accused already released on bail.
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
