Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Vinod Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 566 of 2022
Decided On : 13-05-2022
Bail - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act - The court set aside the order rejecting the bail application and ordered the release of the accused-appellants on bail.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed an appeal under Section 14a (2) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act against the rejection of their bail application in connection with FIR No.100/2022.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order rejecting the bail application cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside, considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the bail application filed on behalf of the appellants under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar and the overall facts and circumstances of the case.
Final Decision: The instant appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside. The accused-appellants were ordered to be released on bail in FIR No.100/2022, Police Station Sangaria, Distt. Hanumangarh.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned learned public prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
2. The instant appeal has 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.100/2022, Police Station Sangaria, Distt. Hanumangarh for the offences under Sections 459, 341, 323, 326 & 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(S) & 3(2)(V) of SC/ST act, against the order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Cases, Hanumangarh in Criminal Misc. Case No.68/2022 (CIS No.67/2022) whereby, the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellants under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have not committed the offences as alleged against them and they are innocent. The appellants are in judicial custody and trial of the case will take a sufficient long time. In these circumstances, the appellants may be released on bail.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail. 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 appellants, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.
5. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Cases, Hanumangarh is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellants (1) Vinod Singh S/o Shri Pratap Singh @ Rampratap and (2) Palaram @ Gopal S/o Shri Pratap Singh @ Rampratap shall be released on bail in FIR No.100/2022, Police Station Sangaria, Disstt. Hanumangarh 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 has the discretion to grant bail after considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case.
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 after considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
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 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'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 grant bail after considering 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 established that the rejection of bail must be justified by substantial reasons, and similar cases should be treated equally under the law.
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.
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
