Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J
DEEPAK KUMAR S/O SHRI RAMNIWAS RAWAT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. These three bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.1097/2024 PS Kardhani Jaipur for offences under Sections 111(3) , 103(1)/55 BNSS and Section 3/25(6) Arms Act . After completion of investigation, police has filed chargesheet in the court concerned for the aforesaid offences.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that bail applications of the co-accused Chetan Sharma and Mrinal Kapoor have been accepted by this Court. He contends that no recovery has been effected at the instance of these accused petitioners and they have been arrested in this case only on the basis of the interrogation of co-accused. As per the prosecution case, the accused persons hatched a conspiracy for murdering one Sanjay in revenge of murder of one Happy Choudhary but before the accused persons could execute their plan, they have been arrested. As per prosecution case, the petitioners were connected with each other via an mobile App. Learned counsel further submits that only on the basis of sus
Bail can be granted based on the nature of allegations, duration of custody, and acceptance of co-accused's bail applications, without commenting on case merits.
Bail granted despite criminal antecedents due to lack of direct evidence linking the applicant to alleged crime.
The court emphasized that a lack of specific overt act against the accused and the completion of the investigation warranted his release on bail despite serious charges.
The absence of prior criminal history and lack of direct involvement in the allegations against the accused-petitioner justified the grant of bail.
The court ruled that bail must be granted based on the presence of concrete evidence; mere allegations are insufficient to deny bail, especially in conspiracy cases.
The court denied bail due to the gravity of the charges and sufficient evidence linking the petitioner to a conspiracy to commit murder.
The court denied bail based on substantial evidence of collusion and deceit among the accused-petitioners in executing forged documents, causing significant financial loss.
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
