Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Ankit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 166 of 2022
Decided On : 02-03-2022
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 on bail.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 14a (2) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act against the rejection of his bail application in connection with FIR No.351/2021.
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 issue was the rejection of the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant in connection with the mentioned FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the compromise between the parties and the absence of pending investigation, leading to the decision to set aside the order rejecting the bail application.
Final Decision: The instant appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside. The accused appellant was ordered to be released on bail upon fulfilling certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned learned public prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. 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 appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.351/2021, Police Station Sadar, Bikaner for the offences under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, Section 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) act and Sections 84, 85 of J.J. act, against the order dated 07.02.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Cases & additional Sessions Judge, Bikaner in Criminal Misc. Bail application No. CIS- 269/2022 whereby the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the complainant submit that after investigation, the police is going to file challan against the petitioner for offence under Sections 363, 366 of IPC, Section 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) act and Sections 84, 85 of J.J. act but the parties have already entered into a compromise and no investigation is pending. In these circumstances, the petitioner may be enlarged 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 appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.
5. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.02.2022 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Cases & additional Sessions Judge, Bikaner is set aside. It is ordered that the accused appellant ankit Kumar S/o Shri Piyarelal shall be released on bail in FIR No.351/2021, Police Station Sadar, Bikaner provided he 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'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 that the circumstances warrant the release of the accused on bail.
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's decision was influenced by the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act, particularly in relation to the grant of bail to the accused-app....
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the offenses and the stage of the trial.
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 has the discretion to set aside the rejection of a bail application after considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court considered the contradictions in the statements of the prosecutrix and the anticipated lengthy trial period as grounds for granting bail to the accused-appellant.
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
