Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Rakesh S/o Shri Mohan Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The instant 2nd application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 of Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in the present matter. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
2. The 1st bail application filed on behalf of petitioner i.e. S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7370/2025 was dismissed vide order dated 21.11.2025 passed by this Court with the liberty to the petitioner to file fresh bail application after recording the statement of constable-Shreechand. After rejection of first bail application, the statement of constable-Shreechand has been recorded as P.W. 01. Hence, this second application for bail has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the contents of FIR, the petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of identification by constable-Shreechand, who was a member of the seizing team, the relevant portion FIR is reproduced as under:
4. It is further submitted that the statement of constable-Shreechand has been recorded as PW-1. It is submitted that in his examination-in-chief, PW-1 stated that the petitioner was identified by him, however, during cross-examin
Bail is a rule in pre-conviction cases; undue delay in trial and unreliable witness identification justify granting bail.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution takes precedence over statutory restrictions on bail, especially when the accused has been in custody for an unreasonable period.
Confessional statements under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act are inadmissible, and lack of evidence warrants bail under NDPS Act.
Bail granted due to lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and fulfillment of conditions under the NDPS Act.
Bail is a rule and jail is an exception; prolonged detention without trial infringes personal liberty under Article 21.
Bail is a rule and jail is an exception; personal liberty under Article 21 cannot be curtailed without substantial evidence, especially in cases of prolonged detention without trial.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of witness examination can justify bail under the NDPS Act, overriding statutory restrictions.
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
