Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR, J
SADDAM S/O SHAUKIN KHAN – 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. 362/2024 registered at Police Station Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur City (East), District Jaipur City (East) for the offence(s) under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109(1) of BNS and Section 3/25 of Arms Act .
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that in the FIR, the name of the accused-petitioner is not mentioned. It is also contended that the main allegations of causing mischief at the house of the complainant Aruna Devi are against the other co-accused and the recovery of fire arm was also effected at the instance of the other co-accused Achitya Singh. It is also contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner, the accused-petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2024, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.
3. Learned GA cum AAG as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have vehemently opposed the grant of bail application.
4. Learned counsel f
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 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 ruled that the severity of the charges and substantial evidence against the accused justified the denial of bail.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and granted bail based on the nature of injuries and absence of recovery from the accused.
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.
The court emphasized that a lack of substantive evidence against the accused-petitioner, combined with prolonged custody, warranted the granting of bail.
Anticipatory bail granted based on absence of specific charges and clean antecedents.
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
