[2025:RJ-JP:17751] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No.1071/2025 Ghanshyam Son Of Shri Ladu Lal, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Village Chitani Police Station Banetha District Tonk (At Present At District Jail Tonk) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Tejmal Son Of Shri Suwa Lal Meena, Resident Of Village Khohlya Police Station Baneth Tehsil Uniyara And District Tonk (Raj) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Atar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP Mr. Lakhan Singh Meena, Adv. Mr. Om Prakash Meena, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 28/04/2025 1. This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the SC/ST Act’) has been filed on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 22.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Court S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Tonk (hereinafter to be referred as ‘trial court’) in Bail Application CIS No.37/2025 (Session Case No.06/2025), whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant. 2. The appellant has been arrested in FIR No.96/2024 registered at Police Station Banetha, District Tonk for the offences [2025:RJ-JP:17751] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1071/2025] punishable under Sections 323, 341, 143 of IPC and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated under Sections 147, 148, 448, 341, 323, 325 and 307 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)(va) of SC/ST Act. He further submits that the other similarly placed co-accused Mahaveer and Geetaram have already been enlarged on bail. The allegation of offence committed by the present appellant are not specific rather omnibus in nature. It is also contended that the first appeal of the appellant was dismissed with the liberty to file afresh after recording of the statement of the injured witnesses- Sorang and Tejmal. The injured witnesses have already been examined and injured witness PW.3 Sorang in his cross-examination did not attributed his injuries to the present appellant and specifically stated that he was hit by some persons and after been hit he became unconscious, therefore, considering the statement of PW.3 Sorang and the other eye-witness Tejmal, the appeal of the accused-appellant may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the appellant. It is contended that the injured Sorang received injuries which are dangerous to life, therefore, considering the allegation levelled in the FIR and in the statement of injured witnesses, the appeal of the accused- appellant may be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused the material available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:17751] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1071/2025] 6. It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case, the statement of the material witnesses have already been recorded, the other similarly placed co-accused Mahaveer and Geetaram have already been enlarged on bail, further trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant, I deem it just and proper to allow the appeal filed by the accused- appellant under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act. 7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act is allowed and order dated 22.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Court S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Tonk is set aside. It is directed that appellant- Ghanshyam S/O Shri Ladu Lal, shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.96/2024 registered at Police Station Banetha, District Tonk, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-4