[2025:RJ-JP:32590] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1205/2025 Narendra Kumar Son Of Shri Sundaram, Aged About 99 Years, Resident Of Nangal Abhaypura Police Station Ranoli District Sikar (Raj) (At Present Appellant Is Confined In Sub Jail Neemkathana) ----Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Sanjeev Kumar Meena Son Of Shri Jhabar Singh Meena, Resident Of Nimera Police Station Khandela District Sikar (Raj) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Atar Singh, Mr. Aman Pareek, Mr. Prem Prakash Dhayal & Mr. Bholu Jat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/08/2025 1. This instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 15.04.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Sikar in Bail Application No.267/2025 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.40/2025 registered at Police Station Khandela, District Sikar for the offences under Sections 333, 351(2), 351(3), 115(2) & 119(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of [2025:RJ-JP:32590] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1205/2025] Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 331(7), 115(2), 117(2), 119(1), 352 & 351(2)(3) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1) (s) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that appellant is local resident. It is submitted that sections of SC/ST Act were added only to make the case grave in nature. It is submitted that co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is argued that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that appellant is in custody since 25.02.2025 and further custody of the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer of bail made in this appeal. He submits that victim/complainant of this case has duly been informed about hearing of this appeal. 4. Despite information, no one has put in appearance to oppose the prayer of appeal. 5. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant as also considering the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any [2025:RJ-JP:32590] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1205/2025] opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail. 7. Consequently, this instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.04.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Sikar is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Narendra Kumar Son Of Shri Sundaram, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No.40/2025 registered at Police Station Khandela, District Sikar, 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. 8. 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 /348