Criminal Antecedents Alone No Ground to Refuse Bail; Community Service Can Be a Bail Condition: Rajasthan High Court

Waris alias Lahaki and Usman alias Andha have been in custody since 09.01.2026 in FIR No. 187/2025 of Police Station Khunkhuna, District Didwana-Kuchaman (paras 1, 6). The prosecution alleged that they cut an SBI ATM with a gas cutter to steal cash, using a stolen vehicle with a forged number plate (paras 4, 6). The charge-sheet invokes BNS Sections 331(4), 305(e), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 345(3) and 61(2) (para 6). The State opposed bail citing three antecedents against Waris and two against Usman (para 4). The Court found that only one of Waris's cases concerned theft and one was already disposed of, while Usman's two cases arose under the Rajasthan bovine-slaughter law (para 7).

Following Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P., the Court held that an accused cannot be denied bail merely because other criminal cases are pending (para 8). It then turned to reformation. The new criminal laws mark a shift from "Dand" to "Nyaya" and introduce community service (para 11), which aims to spare minor offenders harsh incarceration, engage them in serving the community and return them to the mainstream (para 13); jailing minor offenders risks turning them into hardened criminals (paras 14-17). Drawing on Sanjeev Nanda and decisions of the Delhi, Bombay and Rajasthan High Courts, it held that community service may replace short imprisonment in non-heinous cases and may be imposed while granting bail, in addition to the usual conditions (paras 24-27, 35). It carries no remuneration, being punishment and not employment (para 33). Relying on Aparna Bhat, XYZ v. State of M.P. and Kunal Kumar Tiwari, the Court noted that bail conditions must serve the good administration of justice, and held that community service should be avoided as a bail condition in gender-sensitive matters, especially sexual harassment cases (paras 38-41).