Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
IQBAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
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.360/2020 registered at Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 460, 302 and 323 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(5) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Hanumangarh whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the material available on record.
3. The S.B. Criminal Appeal No.140/2023 (Iqbal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.) filed on behalf of the appellant was dismissed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court by detailed order dated 05.04.2023. The order dated 05.04.2023 passed by the co-ordinate Bench is reproduced below for ready reference:-
“The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.360/20
Subsequent bail applications require a change in circumstances; repeated applications without such change are not entertained.
The court established that bail should be granted based on parity with co-accused and the anticipated length of the trial.
The court considered the similarity of allegations with other co-accused persons who had been granted bail and the expected lengthy trial duration as key factors in granting bail to the accused-appel....
The principle of parity requires that if co-accused are granted bail, similar treatment should be extended to the appellant unless distinguishable circumstances exist.
The court established that in cases involving non-serious charges and prolonged trial durations, bail may be granted even under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The court established that lack of specific allegations in the FIR and witness statements can justify the granting of bail under the SC/ST Act.
The court ruled that the lack of evidence regarding the appellant's knowledge of the complainant's caste justified the granting of bail.
The court considered the nature of the offenses, absence of injuries, and expected trial duration in deciding to grant bail to the accused-appellant.
The court established that an accused should be granted bail when co-accused in similar circumstances have been released, emphasizing the principle of parity in bail applications.
The court determined that the appellant's circumstances warranted bail, as they were not worse than those of co-accused already granted bail.
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
