The court established that in bail considerations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the seriousness of allegations must be weighed against the rights of the accused, including their lack of criminal history and the need for a timely trial.

ORDER

1. These four appeals, under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'Act of 1989'), are preferred by appellants to assail impugned orders dated 26.07.2021, 28.10.2021 and 30.10.2021, passed by Special Court, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Sriganganagar (for short, 'learned trial Court') rejecting their bail applications.

2. Complainant lodged FIR against appellants at Police Station Nai Mandi, Gharsana, District Sriganganagar, attributing offences under Sections 307, 341, 323, 324, 325, 326, 147, 148 & 149 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that though, the allegation of causing head injury is against Mukadar Ali is there by gandasi while lathi has been recovered at his instance. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the allegation of causing head injury is against Sikander Ali but he was juvenile as he was below 18 years of age on the date of incident. Learned Senior Counsel also submits that that Sikander Ali should not have been charge-sheeted before the regular Court as per the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and his trial is to be conducted before the Juvenile Justice Board. It is further submitted that omnibus allegations have been levelled against other appellants and their case is at par with case of co-accused Radheyshyam, Naresh Kumar, Bhupendra, Akashdeep and Veerpal Singh @ Vijay Kumar, who have already been granted indulgence of bail by this Court. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel submits that appellants having no criminal antecedents and trial could not be concluded within a short span of time, therefore, indulgence of bail may be granted to them.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant opposed all the four appeals and submits that looking to the gravity and magnitude of offences attributed to the appellants, no interference with the impugned orders is warranted.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations levelled against appellants and co-accused, who have already been granted indulgence of bail, I feel persuaded to set aside the impugned orders qua the appellants.

6. Accordingly, the instant appeals are allowed and impugned orders dated 26.07.2021, 28.10.2021 & 30.10.2021, passed by learned trial Court are set aside qua the appellants. As a consequence of setting aside of the impugned orders qua the appellants, the bail applications of them are allowed and it is ordered that accused-appellants, (1) Sandeep @ Sanju S/o Bhanwarlal, (2) Sikendra Ali @ Sonu S/o Falksher, (3) Mukadar Ali S/o Mohammad Hussain, and (4) Jasvindra Singh S/o Fakir Chandra, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.207/2021, registered at Police Station Nai Mandi, Gharsana, District Sriganganagar, may be released on bail; provided each 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.