Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J
AARISH PATHAN S/O MUNNA ALI – 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 the accused-petitioner. The accused- petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.425/2024, registered at Police Station Anta, District Baran for the offence(s) under Section 309(4) of BNS.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated under Sections 310(2) and 61(2) of BNS. It is contended that the main allegations of committing robbery of jewellry articles are against the other co- accused namely Meran @ Mehran Khan, Shoyab @ Gamori and Aabid Khan @ Kaka. It is alleged against the accused-petitioner that he conducted surveillance of the complainant and furnished information to the other co-accused. It is also contended that apart from the disclosure statements of the co-accused, there is no substantive evidence available on record indicating the fact that the accused-petitioner conducted surveillance of the complainant and thereafter, furnished information to the other co- accused. No recovery of stolen articles were effected from the possession of the accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner is in custody since lon
The court granted bail based on the accused's prolonged custody and lack of substantive evidence linking him to the crime, emphasizing the need for timely trials.
The court affirms that pre-arrest bail is not granted as a matter of course, especially when the allegations are serious and investigations are ongoing.
The court determined that the applicant, after serving seven months in custody and with no prior criminal record, is entitled to bail despite serious allegations against him.
Bail may be granted when there is insufficient evidence against the accused, especially if co-accused have been released on bail.
The court emphasized bail's conditionality regarding cooperation with ongoing investigations, considering prior custody duration.
The court emphasized that a lack of substantive evidence against the accused-petitioner, combined with prolonged custody, warranted the granting of bail.
Judicial custody duration and investigation status warrant bail under specified conditions.
In the absence of substantive evidence, bail may be granted to prevent prolonged custody, even for habitual offenders.
Bail may be granted when serious allegations lack substantial recovery evidence, and judicial custody duration is considered.
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
