Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
SUKHARAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
What is the criteria for granting bail when material witnesses have turned hostile and no weapon is recovered? What is the court’s position on balancing seriousness of allegations against lack of witness support in bail decisions? What are the conditions and limitations the court imposes when granting bail in such cases?
ORDER :
(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)
1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C .) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.163/2024, registered at Police Station Naal, District Bikaner, for offences under Sections 103(1), 331(6), 115(2), 126(2), 324(2), 191(2), 191(3) & 190 of BNS.
2. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR and challan papers, learned counsel submitted that the specific allegation of inflicting fatal injury upon the head of the deceased has been levelled against the co-accused- Ramuram Jaat. Learned counsel further submitted that the statements of the material prosecution witnesses viz. Mala Ram (PW-1), Pana Devi (PW-2), Dama Ram (PW-3) and Pooja (PW-4) have already been recorded before the competent Criminal Court. Learned counsel submitted that the material prosecution witnesses during their Court statements have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that no blunt/sharp weapon allegedly used in commission of the alleged crime has been recovered from the present petitioner.
4. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitione
Bail may be granted when material witnesses turn hostile and no weapon is recovered, despite serious allegations.
The court granted bail based on the nature of injuries being simple and the completion of the investigation, with no risk of influencing witnesses.
The court granted bail to certain accused based on the nature of injuries and judicial custody duration, while emphasizing the need for personal bonds and sureties.
The court granted bail due to insufficient specific allegations against the petitioner and lack of risk of tampering with evidence.
The court granted bail despite serious allegations against co-accused, emphasizing the absence of specific charges against petitioners and the lengthy trial process.
The absence of direct evidence and the lack of witness tampering risk justified granting bail despite serious allegations.
The absence of eye-witnesses and reliance on conjecture justified the granting of bail, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Bail can be granted when allegations involve simple injuries, no criminal history exists, and trial duration is expected to be lengthy.
A petitioner cannot be denied bail solely based on co-accused statements when not named in the FIR and lacking direct evidence.
Bail granted based on the nature of injuries and lengthy trial process, emphasizing that injuries are grievous but not life-threatening.
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
