Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.
Kalusingh - Appellant
Versus
State & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 964 of 2021
Decided On : 26-11-2021
[BAIL] - [SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT] - [The court analyzed the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, particularly in relation to the bail application of the accused. It emphasized the lack of evidence linking the accused to the abetment of suicide, leading to the decision to grant bail despite the serious nature of the allegations.]
Fact of the Case:
The appellants appealed against the rejection of their bail application by the Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, following an FIR alleging offences under IPC and the Act of 1989.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the charge-sheet had been filed and there was insufficient evidence to support the claim that the appellants abetted the deceased's suicide, leading to the conclusion that the trial would take time.
Issues: Whether the appellants should be granted bail despite the serious allegations against them under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the absence of evidence linking the appellants to the abetment of suicide warranted the granting of bail, as the trial process would be lengthy.
Result: The appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the appellants were granted bail under specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Kumar Dhand, J. - The appeal, under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ?Act of 1989?), is preferred by appellants to assail impugned order dated 06.10.2021, passed by Special Court, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Balotra (for short, ?learned trial Court?) rejecting their bail application.
2. Complainant lodged FIR No.148/2021, registered at Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer against appellants attributing offences under Sections 341, 323 & 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(w), 3(1)(Da) (Dha), 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants after investigation, police has submitted charge-sheet against the appellants for the offence under Sections 341, 323 & 306 IPC and 3(2)(w), 3(1)(Da) (Dha), 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989. He further states that there is no evidence against the appellants that they abated or instigated deceased to commit suicide. It is also submitted by learned counsel that after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take its own time.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the appeal and argued that the accused-appellants abated the deceased and threatened him and because of that threats given by accused-appellants, he committed suicide.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record and more particularly, the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take its own time, I feel persuaded to set aside the impugned order.
6. Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by learned trial Court is set aside. As a consequence of setting aside of the impugned order, the bail application of the appellant is allowed and it is ordered that accused-appellant, (1) Kalusingh S/o Amarsingh, (2) Ishwar Singh S/o Bagsingh, and (3) Mansingh S/o Harisingh, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.148/2021, Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer, may be released on bail; provided each one of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds 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 court established that the lack of evidence for abetment of suicide is a critical factor in determining the grant of bail under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities....
The court established that in the absence of direct allegations and with the completion of the investigation, bail can be granted even in cases involving serious charges under the Scheduled Castes an....
The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act in allowing the appeal and granting bail to the appellant.
The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the interpretations of the same, as well as the specific c....
The court established that compliance with procedural requirements and the nature of allegations are critical factors in determining bail under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of ....
Bar will not apply where the complaint does not make out “a prima facie case” for the applicability of the provisions of the Act. A statutory exclusion of the right to access remedies for bail is con....
The seriousness of the offence, the presence of supporting witnesses, and the vulnerability of the complainant and other witnesses influenced the decision to deny bail to the appellant.
Point of Law : Criminal Law – Detenue – Dismissal of bail applications - 1st petitioner is in judicial custody for the last 28 days and other petitioners are under detention for nearly 66 days - Inve....
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the consideration of the nature of allegations, length of custody, and the material contained in the case diary.
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
