Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.
Shiv Dayal - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 378 of 2021
Decided On : 17-09-2021
BAIL - SCHEDULED CASTES & SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT - The court analyzed the gravity of the allegations against the appellant, specifically the charge of causing death by gunshot, and the status of the trial, concluding that the appellant did not merit bail due to the serious nature of the accusations and the evidence presented, particularly eyewitness statements. The court emphasized the importance of the ongoing trial and the need for justice in such serious matters.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed a criminal appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes & the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act concerning FIR No.310/1995, which included serious charges under IPC and the SC & ST Act. The appellant sought bail after being in custody since November 2013, while a co-accused had previously been granted bail.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there were specific allegations against the appellant regarding the death of Surgyan by gunshot, supported by eyewitness testimony. The trial was nearing conclusion, and the court determined that granting bail would not be appropriate given the circumstances.
Issues: Whether the appellant should be granted bail considering the serious nature of the charges and the evidence against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the gravity of the allegations, particularly the charge of murder, and the evidence presented, including eyewitness accounts, justified the denial of bail. The court underscored the importance of maintaining the integrity of the judicial process in serious criminal cases.
Result: The appeal for bail was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes & the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed in connection with FIR No.310/1995 registered at Police Station Hindaun City, District Karauli for the offence under Section(s) 147, 148, 149, 323 & 302 IPC and Section 3 of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ?the Act of 1989?) and later on for the offence under Section(s)147, 148, 149, 323 & 302 IPC and Section 3(1) of the Act of 1989.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant is in custody since 05.11.2013, similarly situated co- accused Janak Kumar has been extended benefit of bail and prayed for his release on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposing the prayer submitted that there is specific allegation against the appellant of causing death of Surgyan by gun shot injury and hence, he does not deserve indulgence of bail. They submitted that co-accused Janak Kumar was granted benefit of bail in the year 2001 and the appellant was absconding at that time. Learned counsel submitted that trial against the appellant stands concluded and the case is fixed for final arguments. They, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
4. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by learned counsels for the respective parties, the nature and gravity of allegation against the appellant, material available on record especially statements of the eye-witnesses which contain specific allegation against the appellant of causing death of Surgyan by gun shot injury and the case being at its fag end; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court does not deem it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
The court established that in cases involving serious allegations such as murder, particularly under the SC & ST Act, the presence of strong evidence and the status of the trial are critical factors ....
Bail can be granted under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act based on the absence of prior criminal records and the circumstances surrounding the case, without prejudicing the merits of the cas....
Bail can be granted under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act when the accused demonstrate no prior criminal record, have been in custody for a considerable time, and the charge sheet has been f....
The court established that the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act must be balanced with the rights of the accused, particularly in cases where the allegations are not severe and t....
The court established that bail can be granted based on the absence of criminal history, the nature of the allegations, and the duration of custody, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the specific circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegation, the appellant's custody, and the absence of criminal antecedents.
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.
Granting bail based on length of custody, filing of charge sheet, and absence of criminal antecedents without expressing opinion on the merits of the case.
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.
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
