SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Raj) 2090

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Kaluram S/o Gheesaram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 814 of 2021
Decided On : 20-12-2021

Advocates appeared:
Narendra Singh Rajpurohit, Advocate, Mukesh Rajpurohit, Advocate, J.P. Bhardwaj, Advocate

The court established that the rejection of bail must be justified by substantial reasons, particularly in cases involving compromises and the health status of the injured party.

Headnote:

[BAIL] - [SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act] - [The court found that the rejection of the bail application was not sustainable given the circumstances, including the injured party's discharge from the hospital and the lengthy trial process. The court emphasized the importance of balancing the rights of the accused with the seriousness of the charges under the SC/ST Act.]

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, Kaluram, was in custody for an alleged offense under Section 307/34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of the SC/ST Act. A bail application was rejected by the Special Judge, prompting the appeal.

Finding of the Court:

The court determined that the reasons for denying bail were insufficient, particularly considering the compromise between parties and the injured party's recovery.

Issues: Whether the rejection of the bail application was justified given the circumstances of the case, including the health of the injured party and the status of the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the denial of bail was not justified in light of the facts presented, including the injured party's discharge and the potential for a lengthy trial.

Result: The appeal was allowed, the previous order was set aside, and the appellant was granted bail under specified conditions.

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14a SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) act, 1989 on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.135/2021, P.S. Sadar Pali, District Pali, for the offence under Section 307/34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of S.C./S.T. act against the order dated 25.08.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Cast/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of atrocities act Cases), Pali, District Pali, whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

2. Counsel for the appellant submits that compromise has arrived at between the parties. Counsel further submits that injured has already been discharged from the hospital. Challan of the case has already been presented. 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. The learned court below has grossly erred in law and facts as well in declining to release the appellant on bail.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned public prosecutor and also perused the material available on record.

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, 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 25.08.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Cast/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of atrocities act Cases), Pali, District Pali is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Kaluram S/o Gheesaram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.135/2021, P.S. Sadar Pali, District Pali 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.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top