Back
2025 Supreme(Raj) 258
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Suresh Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLAS 450 of 2025
Decided On : 20-03-2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail
Act Referred
SEHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES ACT : S.14(a), S.3(1)(r), S.3(1)(s), S.3(2)(v)
BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA : S.103(1), S.115(2), S.126(2), S.3(5), S.352
Headnote
(A) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Section 14A - Bail application - The appellant, in custody for offences under various sections, sought bail after a co-accused was granted bail - The court noted no distinction in the cases and that the prosecution failed to show any apprehension of the appellant influencing witnesses or fleeing - The appeal was allowed, and the previous order denying bail was set aside. (Paras 1, 6, 7)
(B) Bail - Principles - The court emphasized that bail should be considered when the case is not distinguishable from that of co-accused already granted bail and when there is no substantial apprehension of witness tampering or flight risk. (Paras 3, 6)
Mr. Rajendra Charan, Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP
Order :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.291/2024 registered at Police Station Asind, District Bhilwara, for the offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 352 and 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bhilwara whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the appellant was rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that co-accused Shambhu Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2025 in Criminal Appeal (Sb) No.1895/2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the case of present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of co-accused Shambhu Singh, who has already been enlarged on bail.
4. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in custody since 29.08.2024; the challan has already been filed against the appellant before the competent Criminal Court and trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to be concluded, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-appellant.
5. Per Contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the above named co-accused has already been enlarged on bail.
6. Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at Bar, this Court prima facie finds that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused person who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of appellant influencing the material prosecution witnesses of the case or fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail by this Court.
7. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bhilwara is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Suresh Singh S/o Dalu Singh arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.291/2024 registered at Police Station Asind, District Bhilwara shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and 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.
