IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Madan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1405 of 2022
Decided On : 07-12-2022
Bail - SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - The court set aside the order rejecting the bail application, considering specific allegations against co-accused and only omnibus allegation against the appellant.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 14-A(1) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the rejection of his bail application in connection with FIR No.70/2022 for offenses under IPC and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that specific allegations were made against the co-accused, while only omnibus allegations were leveled against the appellant, leading to the setting aside of the rejection of the bail application.
Issues: The issue revolved around the rejection of the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant, who was in custody in connection with the mentioned FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The specific allegations against the co-accused and the nature of the allegations against the appellant influenced the court's decision to set aside the rejection of the bail application.
Final Decision: The instant appeal was allowed, and the impugned order rejecting the bail application was set aside. The accused-appellant was ordered to be released on bail upon fulfilling the specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
2. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(1) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.70/2022, Police Station Barmer Rural, District Barmer for the offences under Sections 364, 302 R/w 120-B of IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act against the order dated 07.05.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Barmer whereby the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.
3. Counsel for the appellant submits that specific allegation has been made by the witnesses against co-accused Sawai Ram, who inflicted head injury to the deceased and cause of death is head injury. Challan of the case has already been presented and no investigation is pending. The accused-appellant is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for bail but learned counsel for the complainant submits that she has no objection if benefit of bail is granted to the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, according to the statement of witnesses, specific allegation has been made against co-accused Sawai Ram and only omnibus allegation has been levelled against the present appellant, therefore, 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 appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.05.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Barmer is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Madan Kumar S/o Sh. Bala Ram, arrested in connection with FIR No.70/2022, Police Station Barmer Rural, District Barmer shall be released on bail; 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 considered the nature of allegations against the appellant and co-accused in deciding the bail application under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the nature of injuries and the length of the trial, as per the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The court's decision to grant bail to the accused-appellant was based on the consideration of the entirety of facts and circumstances available on record.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the rejection of bail applications can be set aside if found unsustainable.
The court considered the compromise between the parties and the lengthy trial process as grounds for setting aside the order and granting bail to the accused-appellant.
The court established that the rejection of bail must be justified by substantial reasons, particularly considering the severity of injuries and the duration of custody.
The court established that the rejection of bail must be justified by substantial reasons, particularly when similar cases have resulted in bail being granted.
The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of Section 14-A(1) of SC/ST (PA) Act, which allowed for the grant of 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.
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.
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.