Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Rohitash S/o Banwari Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of criminal bail application. (Para 1) |
| 2. conflicting contentions regarding procedural defaults and bail eligibility. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. judicial assessment of justifying circumstances for bail. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. imposition of conditional bail release terms. (Para 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Rohitash S/o Banwari Lal, seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.253/2020 dated 10.07.2020 registered at P.S. Deoli District - Tonk, for the offence under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with trial, which will take time.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner accused was released on bail pursuant to order dated 28.02.2022, but due to certain unforeseen
Where an accused defaults on bail conditions due to a justifiable reason and is no longer required for investigation, the court may exercise its discretion to grant bail, particularly when the trial ....
Bail in serious criminal matters is not granted when the material on record establishes a prima facie case of complicity, particularly in successive applications where the gravity of the allegations ....
The court established that non-appearance at a specific hearing was not deliberate, allowing for bail based on reasonable circumstances.
Bail granted due to lack of evidence from material witnesses and absence of criminal antecedents, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Prolonged custody without trial completion and lack of specific allegations justify granting bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
Prolonged judicial custody and lack of prosecution witness examination justify granting bail under the NDPS Act.
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.
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
