Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J
DAU RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 274/2020 registered at Police Station Lohawat, District Jodhpur Rural for the offence(s) under Sections 147, 148, 323, 307, 460, 302, 149 of IPC and Sections 3/25 and 3/27 of Arms Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that FIR was lodged with the delay of almost 20 hours. It is also contended that cross case was also registered against the complainant party and co-accused Lakha Ram also sustained injuries and the prosecution has not explained injuries caused to Lakha Ram. Against the complainant party the charge- sheet was submitted for the offence under Section 307 of IPC. The main eye witnesses have not supported the prosecution story. The statement of PW-1 Narayan Ram and PW-2 Narendra are not believable, PW-1 Narayan Ram is person having criminal antecedents and against him several criminal cases were registered by the petitioner and other co-accused. Similarly, there are lot of contradictions in th
Long incarceration does not warrant bail in serious offences like murder when credible evidence and specific allegations against the accused exist.
The court ruled that the severity of the charges and substantial evidence against the accused justified the denial of bail.
Bail granted as allegations against the accused-petitioner did not substantiate a denial of bail, emphasizing the lack of murderous intent.
The court granted bail to the accused-petitioners due to non-specific allegations and their prolonged custody, emphasizing the need for just treatment in the bail process.
The court emphasized the balance between the gravity of the offence and the accused's right to liberty, allowing bail due to lengthy trial and similar circumstances of co-accused.
The court emphasized the need to consider the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the severity of the accusation, and the criminal antecedents of the accused in granting bail.
The court ruled that the presumption of innocence and the right to a speedy trial necessitate the grant of bail when trial delays are unreasonable.
The court denied bail due to direct allegations against the petitioner and the progression of trial, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges.
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
