HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
ROOP SINGH – 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.425/2024 registered at Police Station Gogunda, District Udaipur, for offence under Section 108 of BNS.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Vidhya Bai (S. B. Cr. Misc.Bail Application No.243/2025) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2025. Learned counsel submitted that the co-accused of the present petitioner is not worse than the above named co-accused person 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 the co-accused Vidhya Devi has already been enlarged on bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
6. The order
The absence of direct evidence of mens rea precludes liability for abetment of suicide, justifying bail for the accused.
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.
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.
The court emphasized that if co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioner unless distinguishable factors exist.
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 if the accused is in judicial custody, the trial will take a long time, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses.
The court ruled that lack of evidence for intent to instigate suicide justifies granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Bail can be granted when investigation is complete and co-accused have received bail, despite serious allegations.
The absence of mens rea or intention to instigate suicide under Section 306 IPC justifies the grant of bail.
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.