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) 560

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
RUPA RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 16068 / 2024



Advocates:
Mr. Prem Dayal Bohra, Mr. N.K. Gurjar, GA cum AAG, Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP

The court granted bail to petitioners based on similar circumstances to co-accused previously granted bail, emphasizing no opinion on case merits.

Headnote:

(A) Bail Application - Section 483 BNSS - Petitioners arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.294/2024 for various offences - Co-accused previously granted bail - Petitioners argue similar circumstances warranting bail - Public Prosecutor opposes but cannot refute co-accused's bail - Court finds merit in petitioners' request for bail. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Judicial Custody - Lengthy trial anticipated - Court emphasizes no opinion on merits of the case - Bail granted under conditions of personal bond and sureties. (Paras 6-8)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners arrested for serious offences, previously co-accused granted bail, petitioners argue for similar treatment due to lengthy trial.

Findings of Court:
Bail applications accepted, petitioners to be released on bail upon fulfilling bond and surety conditions.

Issues: Whether the petitioners should be granted bail considering the co-accused have been granted bail under similar circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the petitioners' circumstances were not distinguishable from those of co-accused who were granted bail, thus justifying the acceptance of their bail application.

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.294/2024 registered at Police Station Aburoad Sadar, Dist. Sirohi, for the offences punishable under Sections 326(g), 331(3), 190, 189(2), 305, 301 and 324(4) of BNS.

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

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the co-accused persons namely Prema Ram, Kela Ram, Raju, Lallu, Hinda, Kanti, Rayla, Suresh and Kala (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.13849/2024) have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the case of the present petitioners are not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail. 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.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the above named co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024.

5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/ demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed by the petitioners deserve to be accepted.

6. Consequently, this bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Rupa Ram S/o Veera and (2) Amra Ram S/o Meeta arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.294/2024 registered at Police Station Aburoad Sadar, Dist. Sirohi, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) 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.

7. 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