Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI, J
MOHANLAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
| S.No. | Particulars of the Case | |
| 1. | FIR Number | 105/2024 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Chopasni Housing Board |
| 3. | District | Jodhpur City West |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act |
| 5. | Offences added, if any | Section 8/22 r.w. Section 29 of the NDPS Act |
| 6. | Date of passing of impugned order | 07.12.2024 |
2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused- petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.
3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.
4. I have heard and considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. It is emanating from the record
Insufficient evidence, primarily based on co-accused statements, does not justify prolonged incarceration; bail granted maintaining parity with co-accused.
The court established that the principle of parity in bail applications is crucial when co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances.
The court emphasized the fundamental right to a speedy trial over statutory restrictions on bail, allowing bail due to prolonged incarceration without trial.
The court emphasized that the grant of bail is contingent upon the circumstances of the case, particularly in relation to co-accused and the absence of factors against bail.
The court emphasized the principle of parity in granting bail, particularly when co-accused have been released under similar circumstances.
The court granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the principle of parity and the extended duration of the trial, emphasizing the lack of strong evidence against the accused.
The court established that in the absence of substantial evidence linking the accused to the crime, the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not bar the granting of bail.
The court emphasized that personal liberty must be prioritized over statutory restrictions in granting bail, especially when there are violations of mandatory provisions.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the grant of bail was based on the lack of incriminating evidence against the applicant, with the only material available being the statem....
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
