Back
2025 Supreme(RAJ) 1095
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA, J
KALU URF BALA S/O RAMCHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLAS / 3198 / 2024
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Bail - Grant of bail to accused-appellants is justified due to the lack of supportive evidence from material witnesses and the potential for false implications - The court emphasized the need to consider the evidence presented and the duration of custody. (Paras 5 and 6)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were accused in FIR No.56/2024 for serious offences under IPC and SC/ST Act, with the trial court denying bail based on witness statements.
Findings of Court:
The court found the evidence insufficient to deny bail, especially considering the hostility of key witnesses and the length of custody.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of witness statements and the justification for denying bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the probability of false implications, combined with the hostility of witnesses and the length of custody, warranted the granting of bail.
Result: Appeals allowed, bail granted.
Mr. Aman Ali, Mr. Rohit Khandelwal, Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP, Mr. Vijendra Yadav for complainant
Order :
1. Both of these criminal appeals have been filed under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the SC/ST Act’) on behalf of the appellants being aggrieved with the order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Tonk (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the trial court’) in Bail Application(C.I.S.) No.150/2024, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellants in connection with FIR No.56/2024 registered at Police Station Peeplu, District Tonk for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 436, 504 & 34 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. Later on charges were framed for offences under Section 427 & 307 of IPC.
2. The first appeals of both the appellants were dismissed by this Court vide order dated 07.10.2024 with liberty to file fresh appeal after examination of the material prosecution witnesses namely; Dev Lal, Birbal & Shoeb.
3. Heard.
4. Considered the submissions made at Bar and also perused the statements of the material prosecution witnesses namely; Dev Lal, Birbal & Shoeb.
5. The witness- Birbal (PW2) has not supported the prosecution story and has been declared hostile. Witness Shoeb (PW1) has also not supported the prosecution story and has been declared hostile. Though the witness- Dev Lal who is the complainant, has made specific allegations against the present accused- appellants as regards the involvement in the crime, however, taking into consideration the evidence of the two other independent witnesses namely; Dev Lal & Shoeb, the probability of false implications cannot be ruled out and the accused- appellants are in custody since 02.07.2024 and as per the list of witnesses out of total 21 prosecution witnesses only four has been examined so far, this Court feels that the accused-appellants deserve to be released on bail.
6. Accordingly, these criminal appeals filed under Section 14-A of SC/ST Act is allowed and order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Kota is set aside. It is directed that appellant shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.54/2024 registered at Police Station Mahaveer Nagar, District Kota City, provided each of them shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
7. The Registry is directed to place a copy of this order in connected case file.
