HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
AMRIT LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 150 / 2025
(A) BNS - Sections 137(2), 126(2), 115(2), 3(5), 331(6), 117(2) - Bail application - Petitioners arrested for grievous injuries not dangerous to life - Judicial custody and lengthy trial considered - Bail granted with conditions of personal bond and sureties. (Paras 1, 2, 3)
(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail include nature of injuries, duration of custody, and potential delay in trial - Court refrains from commenting on merits of the case. (Paras 4, 5)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners arrested in connection with FIR No.148/2024 for grievous injuries inflicted on Manju Devi, occurring on 30.11.2024, which are not dangerous to life.
Findings of Court:
Bail application accepted; petitioners to be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and sureties.
Issues: Whether the nature of injuries and duration of custody warrant the granting of bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the nature of injuries, being grievous but not life-threatening, alongside the lengthy trial process, justified the granting of bail.
Result: Bail application allowed.
ORDER :
(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)
This application for bail under Section 483 of BNS S (439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.148/2024 registered at Police Station Parsad, District Salumber, for offences under Sections 137(2), 126(2), 115(2), 3(5), 331(6) and 117(2) of BNS.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the alleged incident, which occurred on 30.11.2024, the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured- Manju Devi are though grievous in nature but the same are not dangerous to life.
4. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are 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-petitioners.
5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured- Manju Devi are though grievous in nature but the same are not dangerous to life.
6. 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 application filed by the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Amrit Lal S/o Kachra (2) Rakesh S/o Bhagwanlal and (3) Vijay Kumar S/o Arjunlal, arrested in connection with FIR No.148/2024 registered at Police Station Parsad, District Salumber, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- 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.
8. 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.
Bail granted based on the nature of injuries and lengthy trial process, emphasizing that injuries are grievous but not life-threatening.
Bail can be granted when allegations involve simple injuries, no criminal history exists, and trial duration is expected to be lengthy.
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 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 when co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioners, considering the lengthy trial duration.
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.
Bail can be granted even for serious allegations if the injuries are grievous but not life-threatening, and the investigation is complete.
The absence of direct evidence and the lack of witness tampering risk justified granting bail 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.
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.
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.