Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction When Death Is Caused by an Unforeseeable Forest Fire, Criminal Prosecution Cannot Be Sustained Without Proof of Rashness, Negligence, or Knowledge: Supreme Court Proof of Accident Alone is Not Enough – Claimants Must Prove Involvement of Offending Vehicle Under Section 166 MV Act: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal for Compensation in Fatal Road Accident Case Income Tax | Search Means Search, Not ‘Other Person’: Section 153C Collapses When the Assessee Himself Is Searched: Karnataka High Court Draws a Clear Red Line License Fee on Hoardings is Regulatory, Not Tax; GST Does Not Bar Municipal Levy: Bombay High Court Filing Forged Bank Statement to Mislead Court in Maintenance Case Is Prima Facie Offence Under Section 466 IPC: Allahabad High Court Upholds Summoning Continued Cruelty and Concealment of Infertility Justify Divorce: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Divorce Disguising Punishment as Simplicity Is Abuse of Power: Delhi High Court Quashes Dismissals of Civil Defence Volunteers for Being Stigmatic, Not Simpliciter Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD"

Granting Bail on Parity Reflects Judicial Consistency," Says Rajasthan High Court in Cheating Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Accused Sukhdev Singh and Nirmal Singh Bhangu granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., following the release of co-accused on similar charges.

The Rajasthan High Court has granted bail to Sukhdev Singh and Nirmal Singh Bhangu, accused in a high-profile cheating and conspiracy case under Sections 420, 406, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The decision, delivered by Justice Farjand Ali, emphasized the principles of bail jurisprudence and the necessity of maintaining judicial consistency by granting bail on grounds of parity with previously released co-accused.

The case involves Sukhdev Singh and Nirmal Singh Bhangu, who were accused of cheating (Section 420 IPC), criminal breach of trust (Section 406 IPC), and criminal conspiracy (Section 120-B IPC) in FIR Number 249/2018 at Police Station Jalupura, District Jaipur.

Justice Farjand Ali elaborated on the bail jurisprudence applicable to offences triable by a Court of Magistrate. The court reiterated that: “It is run of the mill for High Courts as well as Hon’ble the Apex Court to grant bail in cases concerning offences that are triable by Magistrate.”

The court cited the established legal principle that bail should generally be granted in cases where the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty and that the accused should be allowed to attend trial from home unless there are compelling reasons to keep them detained.

A significant factor in the court's decision was the principle of parity. The court noted that co-accused Subrato Bhattacharya and Gurmeet Singh had already been granted bail on April 20, 2022. The court stated: “The case of the petitioners is not distinguishable with that of the case of the co-accused Subrato Bhattacharya who has already been enlarged on bail.”

Justice Ali emphasized that the accused should not be detained during the lengthy trial process for offences triable by a Magistrate. He quoted previous judgments to underline that prolonged pre-trial detention equates to an unjustified extension of sentence without conviction: “The only thing which a court of law is to ascertain while entertaining a bail plea is whether the accused should be allowed to come to the court to attend the judicial proceeding from his home and he may be allowed to remain with his family and within the society.”

The High Court’s decision to grant bail to Sukhdev Singh and Nirmal Singh Bhangu underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the principles of bail jurisprudence and judicial consistency. By granting bail on grounds of parity, the court has reinforced the legal framework that governs the treatment of accused individuals in cases of non-bailable offences triable by a Magistrate. This judgment is expected to influence future cases, emphasizing the importance of maintaining consistent judicial standards and the presumption of innocence.

Date of Decision: 03/05/2024

SUKHDEV SINGH  VS   STATE OF RAJASTHAN     

Latest Legal News