Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
ROHIT @ AALU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.149/2023, registered at Police Station Abu Road City, District Sirohi, for offences under Sections 148, 341, 323, 325, 307 and 302/149 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused- Manish @ Maniya (S.B . Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No.12136/2024) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 22.01.2025.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused-Manish @ Maniya who has already been enlarged on bail.
4. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. 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 - Manish @ Maniya has already been enlarged on bail.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Peru
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 when investigation is complete and no risk of influencing witnesses exists, emphasizing case-specific evaluation.
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.
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.
The absence of direct evidence and the lack of witness tampering risk justified granting bail despite serious allegations.
The absence of direct evidence of mens rea precludes liability for abetment of suicide, justifying bail for the accused.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when the accused is in custody for an extended period, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses, especially when a co-accused has been granted ba....
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 can be granted based on parity with co-accused, provided there is no risk of the accused influencing witnesses or fleeing justice.
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.
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
