HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
HARKHA RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.114/2024 registered at Police Station Sankda, District Jaisalmer, for offences under Sections 498A and 323 IPC and Sections 110, 123 and 49 of BNS.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Sugani @ Sugana (S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.14661/2024) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not worse than the case of above named co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; challan has already been filed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that co-accused Sugani @ Sugana has already been enlarged on bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused
Bail may be granted when the accused has not played an active role in the alleged crime and the trial is expected to be lengthy.
Bail may be granted when investigation is complete and no risk of influencing witnesses exists, emphasizing case-specific evaluation.
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.
The court emphasized that if co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioner unless distinguishable factors exist.
The absence of direct evidence of mens rea precludes liability for abetment of suicide, justifying bail for the accused.
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 investigation is complete and co-accused have received bail, despite serious allegations.
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 when petitioners are not specifically named in the FIR and have no assigned role in the alleged crime, highlighting the discretionary nature of bail.
The absence of direct evidence and the lack of witness tampering risk justified granting bail despite serious allegations.
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.