Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Sahbaj Sohel - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 515 of 2021
Decided On : 01-10-2021
BAIL - SC/ST Act - The court found that the delay in filing the FIR and the completion of the investigation warranted the granting of bail to the appellant. The court emphasized the need for a balanced approach in considering bail applications under the SC/ST Act, particularly when the trial may take a significant amount of time to conclude.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Sahbaj Sohel, was in custody for serious offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act, with the FIR filed in 2021 alleging acts dating back to 2017. The appellant sought bail after the rejection of his application by the Special Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The court determined that the reasons for the delay in filing the FIR and the completion of the investigation were significant factors that justified granting bail. The court noted that the trial would take a considerable time to conclude.
Issues: Whether the appellant should be granted bail considering the delay in filing the FIR and the status of the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in lodging the FIR and the completion of the investigation were compelling reasons to grant bail, emphasizing the importance of not denying bail solely based on the nature of the allegations.
Result: The appeal was allowed, the order rejecting bail was set aside, and the appellant was granted bail on specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as 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 appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.83/2021, P.S. Deedwana, District Nagaur, for the offences under Sections 354-GH, 450, 457, 341, 384, 376(2) IPC and Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v)(va) of SC/ST Act and Section 67 of I.T. Act against the order dated 19.05.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Merta, District Nagaur, in Criminal Misc.(Bail) Application No.81/2021 whereby, the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that according to the statement of the prosecutrix, first act by the appellant was committed in the year 2017 and no report was lodged at that time so there is delay in filing the F.I.R. Challan of the case has already been presented and no investigation is pending. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore the appellant may be released on bail.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail made by the appellant.
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 appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 19.05.2021 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Merta, District Nagaur is set aside. It is ordered that the accused appellant Sahbaj Sohel S/o Sawalin shall be released on bail in FIR No.83/2021, P.S. Deedwana, District Nagaur, 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. If the appellant threatens/influence the prosecutrix after his release, the prosecutirx is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.
The court established that delays in filing FIRs and the status of investigations are critical factors in bail considerations under the SC/ST Act, allowing for a more nuanced approach to bail applica....
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 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'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 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 established that bail applications under the SC/ST Act must be evaluated with careful consideration of all relevant facts, including compromises and the treatment of co-accused.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case.
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 grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the offenses and the stage of the trial.
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
