Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:32596] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1326/2025
1. Pradhan S/o Jagdish, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 1356, Sikarpura Govindpura Pani Ki Tanki Ke Pass, Sanganer, Ps Sadar Dist. Jaipur (Accused In Central Jail Jaipur)
2. Sawairam S/o Jagdish, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 1356, Sikarpura Govindpura Pani Ki Tanki Ke Pass, Sanganer, PS Sadar District Jaipur (Accused In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Appellants Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Banwari S/o Lallu Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Patalvas, PS Tunga District Jaipur ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ritesh Jain with Mr. Ramdev Arya For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 19/08/2025
1.
Learned counsel for the appellants do not press this criminal appeal qua accused-appellant No.1. 2. Accordingly, the instant criminal appeal is dismissed as not pressed qua accused-appellant No.1 Pradhan S/o Jagdish. 3. So far as accused-appellant No.2 Sawairam Son of Jagdish is concerned, this instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Tonk in Bail Application No.26/2024 (CIS No.29/2024) rejecting the bail application
[2025:RJ-JP:32596] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1326/2025] preferred on behalf of the appellants, who are in custody in connection with FIR No.82/2023 registered at Police Station Pachewar, District Tonk for the offences under Section 302 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 203 & 120B of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that no cogent evidence is available on record against the appellant. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submit that appellant is in custody since 12.12.2023 and further custody of the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made in this appeal. He submits that victim/complainant of this case has duly been informed about hearing of this appeal. 6. Despite information, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the victim/complainant to oppose the prayer for bail made in this appeal. 7. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the role attributed to the appellant and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion
[2025:RJ-JP:32596] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1326/2025] as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail. 9. Consequently, this instant appeal is partly allowed.
The impugned order dated 07.03.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Tonk is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Sawairam S/o Jagdish, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No.82/2023 registered at Police Station Pachewar, District Tonk, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he shall furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties 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. 10. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant appeal (bail) and shall not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /350