Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Yuvraj Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 637, 6378 of 2022
Decided On : 16-05-2022
Bail - SC/ST Act - The court set aside the order rejecting the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and ordered the release of the accused appellants on bail, considering the fact of compromise and the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed appeals under Section 14a (2) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act against the order rejecting their bail application in connection with FIR No.121/2022 for offenses under Sections 143, 323, 336 of IPC and Section 3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order rejecting the bail application cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside, and consequently allowed the appeals, ordering the release of the accused appellants on bail.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the appellants in connection with the mentioned FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the fact of compromise and the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case in reaching the decision to set aside the order rejecting the bail application and to release the accused appellants on bail.
Final Decision: The instant appeals were allowed, and the impugned order rejecting the bail application was set aside, with the accused appellants being ordered to be released on bail.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned learned public prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.
2. The instant appeals have been filed under Section 14a (2) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act on behalf of the appellants, who are in custody in connection with FIR No.121/2022, Police Station Gotan, Distt. Nagaur for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 336 of IPC and Section 3(1)(R)(S), 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST act, against the order dated 06.05.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Cases, Merta in Criminal Misc. (Bail) application Nos.97/2022 and 96/2022 whereby, the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellants under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants have not committed the offences as alleged against them and they are innocent. It is further submitted that now, a compromise has been arrived in between the parties. In these circumstances, the appellants may be released on bail.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the complainant concurs the fact of compromise.
5. Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this Court is of the opinion that the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.
6. Consequently, the instant appeals are allowed. The impugned order dated 06.05.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Cases, Merta is set aside. It is ordered that the accused appellants (1) Yuvraj Singh S/o Umaid Singh, (2) Gopal Singh @ Happy Singh S/o Rughnath Singh, (3) Jitu Singh S/o Swai Singh, (4) Ramveer Singh S/o Nensingh, (5) Ramswraoop S/o Mangidas, (6) Govind Das S/o Mangi Das, (7) Govind Ram S/o Mohan Ram and (8) arjun Singh S/o Pappu Singh shall be released on bail in FIR No.121/2022, Police Station Gotan, Distt. Nagaur provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
The court's decision was influenced by the consideration of the fact of compromise and the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case in setting aside the order rejecting the bail application an....
The court has the discretion to set aside the rejection of a bail application if it deems that the order cannot be sustained based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case.
The court established that the rejection of bail must be justified by substantial reasons, and similar cases should be treated equally under the law.
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the bail provisions under the SC/ST Act and the consideration of the circumstances and arguments presented.
The court has the discretion to set aside the rejection of a bail application if it deems the order cannot be sustained based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of bail applications under the SC/ST Act and IPC offenses should be based on specific allegations and the severity of injuries.
The court considered the false implication of the appellant and the existence of a compromise as key factors in setting aside the order rejecting the bail application and ordering the release of the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to set aside the rejection of a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and grant bail to the appellant under the SC/ST Ac....
The court has the discretion to set aside the rejection of a bail application after considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
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
