Supreme Court: In a criminal appeal against the order of Rajasthan High Court, wherein the Court rejected the bail to an undertrial prisoner facing charges of committing murder, the division bench of Hrishikesh Roy and Pankaj Mithal,JJ. while granting leave to appeal, set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to be decided afresh.
An FIR was registered against the accused and seven other co-accused persons under Sections 143, 323 and 341 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). That indue course of time, Section 302 of IPC, was added, as during the investigation, the injured person died during the treatment. That in due course of time, the co-accused persons were granted bail by the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, bench at Jaipur
The accused submitted that on the date of passing the impugned order, lawyers were on strike in Rajasthan and therefore there was no legal representation for him, and his son appeared on his behalf. Thus, bail was rejected. It was further pointed out that the accused has been in custody since 31-01-2022 and although a charge sheet is filed, the trial of the case is yet to commence. Considering these circumstances and particularly the fact that the accused was not represented by his counsel on 17-03-2023, remanded the matter so that the High Court can hear the accused’s counsel and then pass appropriate orders. Thus, the Bench set aside the impugned order and restored the bail application and ordered it to be considered again by the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court.
[Bhagwan Das v. State of Rajasthan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 928, Order dated 02-08-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner(s): Advocate -On -Record Namit Saxena, Advocate Awnish Maithani, Advocate Shivam Raghuwanshi;
For Respondent(s): Advocate Vishal Meghwal, Advocate Rishi Kapoor, Advocate -On -Record Ronak Karanpuria, Advocate -On -Record Milind Kumar.
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
