IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Farjand Ali, J.
Chetan Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1925 of 2022
Decided On : 20-12-2022
Bail - SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - The court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the accused-appellant Chetan Ram in connection with FIR No. 207/2022, Police Station Balesar, District Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed an appeal for bail under Section 14A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in connection with FIR No. 207/2022, Police Station Balesar, District Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the arguments and the totality of facts and circumstances, refrained from passing any comment on the nature of the accusation and the quality of evidence, but concluded that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. The court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, ordering the release of the accused-appellant on bail.
Issues: The issues involved in the case revolved around the nature of the accusation, the quality of evidence, and the eligibility of the appellant for bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the totality of facts and circumstances, and the consideration of the arguments presented by the learned counsel for the appellant and the Public Prosecutor. The court refrained from commenting on the nature of the accusation and the quality of evidence but found that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and ordered the release of the accused-appellant on bail, subject 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.
JUDGMENT
Farjand Ali, J. - The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No. 207/2022, Police Station Balesar, District Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the prosecutrix is a grown up married lady of 26 years having four children who states in the FIR itself that the appellant was seducing her since last six months. It has not been stated in the FIR that what prevented the prosecutrix to get the matter reported to the police promptly. Thus, learned counsel submits that the very registration of the FIR is highly questionable. It is further submitted that earlier she alleged allegations of rape against her brother-in-law but thereafter she entered into compromise with him and then reported the matter against the appellant. Therefore, benefit of bail may be granted to the appellant.
3. Per contra, learned learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application.
4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.
5. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced, at this stage of the infancy of trial I refrain in passing any comment over the nature of accusation and the quality of evidence yet this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.11.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jodhpur Metropolitan is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant-Chetan Ram S/o Shri Poona Ram Meghwal arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- 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 main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion in granting bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act based on the totality of facts and circumstances, and the co....
The court ruled that lack of supporting evidence from key witnesses and prolonged detention justified granting bail under the SC/ST Act.
The court's decision was influenced by the change in the prosecutrix's statement and the expected lengthy trial duration in granting bail to the accused-appellant.
The court found sufficient grounds for bail, noting the possibility of consent and the lack of alarm raised by the complainant during the incident, thus granting bail despite serious charges.
The court established that inconsistencies in a victim's testimony can significantly impact the decision to grant bail, reinforcing the principle of presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings.
The court considered the nature of the offenses, absence of injuries, and expected trial duration in deciding to grant bail to the accused-appellant.
The court established that in cases involving non-serious charges and prolonged trial durations, bail may be granted even under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.