Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J
MAHENDRA MEENA SON OF RAMEKSH MEENA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.595/2024, registered at Police Station Lalsot, District Dausa, for the offence(s) under Sections 125(a), 281 and 106(1) of B.N.S.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated for the offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 103(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S. It is contended that in the FIR, it is alleged that the driver of vehicle bearing No.RJ-25-CB-4135, drove the vehicle rash and negligently and caused injuries to several persons and one Golu Meena succumb to death. Initially the FIR was registered for the offences under Sections 125(a), 281, 106(1) of BNS and later on, Sections 109(1), 103(2), 126(2) and 115(2) of BNS were added. It is also contended that at the time of incident the accused-petitioner was not driving the vehicle, the allegation of causing death of deceased Golu and causing injuries to the other persons is attributed to Abhishek Meena. The accused-petitioner has been arrested solely on the ground that he is the registered own
The court granted bail to the accused-petitioner due to insufficient evidence linking him to the negligent driving incident, emphasizing the importance of trial duration in bail considerations.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and granted bail based on the nature of injuries and absence of recovery from the accused.
Accused-petitioner granted bail due to lack of criminal antecedents and insufficient evidence linking him to the injury caused, as allegations primarily attributed to co-accused.
The court granted bail based on the absence of criminal antecedents and significant delay in arrest, emphasizing these factors in the context of the bail application.
The court granted bail to the accused-petitioners due to non-specific allegations and their prolonged custody, emphasizing the need for just treatment in the bail process.
The absence of eye-witnesses and reliance on conjecture justified the granting of bail, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
The court granted bail based on the nature of injuries and lack of motive, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
The court granted bail based on the non-life-threatening nature of the injuries and the completion of the investigation, emphasizing the importance of trial duration in bail considerations.
Bail granted as allegations against the accused-petitioner did not substantiate a denial of bail, emphasizing the lack of murderous intent.
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
