Back
SUMEET GOEL
X (6867) – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sumeet Goel, J.
1. The present second petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail in FIR No. 0066 dated 26.03.2024 registered under Sections 323 , 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC at Police Station Matlauda, District Panipat.
2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out by the petitioner in the present petition) is as follows:
A second regular bail petition is permissible without statutory prohibition, but must demonstrate substantial change in circumstances; the severity of allegations influences bail considerations.
The court established that serious allegations of sexual offenses and extortion, coupled with the petitioner's criminal history, are sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Successive bail petitions are permissible if substantial changes in circumstances are demonstrated, ensuring the rights of the accused and the victim are balanced.
Second or successive bail petitions are maintainable when substantial changes in circumstances occur; however, public safety and the gravity of the offence must be prioritized.
The court emphasized the diminishing need for pre-trial detention when prosecution evidence nears completion, recognizing the accused's right to prepare a defense.
Prolonged detention without trial infringes on the fundamental right to life and liberty, necessitating bail even for serious offences if trial delays are unjustifiable.
The court underscored that in cases of sexual violence, the victim's dignity and safety are paramount, necessitating a cautious approach to bail applications.
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
