Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Prabhu Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.153/2024, registered at Police Station Rajnagar, District Rajsamand , for offences under Sections 341, 323, 447, 302, 201 and 34 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused-Sajjan Singh (S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No.13657/2024) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not at all distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused person who have already been enlarged on bail.
3. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that looking to the seriousness of the accusations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitione
The absence of eyewitnesses and lack of evidence against the accused justified the grant of bail, emphasizing the principle of preventing unnecessary detention without risk of influencing witnesses.
The absence of direct evidence and the lack of witness tampering risk justified granting bail despite serious allegations.
Bail can be granted when co-accused are released and specific allegations against the petitioner are lacking, considering the duration of judicial custody.
Bail granted due to lack of evidence from material witnesses and absence of criminal antecedents, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Bail should not be denied without specific evidence against the accused, and the absence of prior animosity supports the case for bail.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and indefinite detention without trial is impermissible, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The court granted bail based on the principle of parity, finding no distinguishable role of the petitioner compared to a co-accused already released on bail.
The grant of bail is justified when material prosecution witnesses turn hostile, indicating insufficient evidence for conviction.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence linking the petitioner to the crime and the lengthy duration of judicial custody.
The court may grant bail if the nature of allegations is serious but injuries are minor, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses or fleeing.
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
