Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Kishanlal – Appellant
Versus
State of Raajsthan – Respondent
Order :
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.250/2024 registered at Police Station Bichhwal, District Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 103(1), 109(2), 115(2), 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190 and 61(2)(a) of BNS and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 22.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bikaner whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the appellant was rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution, the appellant and the other co-accused persons were having a land dispute with the complainant party and mainly owing to the aforesaid dispute between the parties, the appellant and the co-accused persons, on the date of the alleged incident, inflicted multiple inju
Insufficient evidence and lack of specific allegations against the appellant justified the granting of bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) 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 emphasized that vague allegations do not justify denial of bail, particularly when the accused claims self-defense and has no criminal history.
The court ruled that the nature of injuries and completion of investigation are critical factors in bail decisions, emphasizing that serious allegations do not automatically warrant denial of bail.
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 bail should be granted based on parity with co-accused and the anticipated length of the trial.
The court granted bail to the appellants, emphasizing that the injuries were grievous but not life-threatening, and the investigation was concluded.
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 court established that the nature of injuries and the treatment of co-accused in similar cases are critical factors in bail considerations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Bail can be granted based on parity with co-accused and the absence of evidence justifying continued detention, emphasizing the need for expeditious trial.
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
