[2025:RJ-JP:37404] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1563/2025 Sunil @ Sullu @ Surendra Son Of Buddharam, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Sathlaka Police Station Bhiwadi Phase-III District Alwar (Raj) (At Present Confined At Jail Alwar) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its PP 2. Suresh Chand Son Of Magturam, Resident Of Kheda Brahaman Deeg District Bharatpur Rajasthan ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Yash Vardhan Nandwana with Mr. Shiv Kumar Jangir and Mr. Sameer Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/09/2025 1. This appeal under Section 14A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) has been filed Act being aggrieved of the order dated 18.03.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar in Bail Application No.50/2025 (CIS No.44/2025) rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.55/2023 registered at Police Station Bhiwadi Phase-III, District Bhiwadi for offences under Sections 302 & 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. [2025:RJ-JP:37404] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1563/2025] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that charge-sheet was filed against the appellant on the basis of statement of three eye witnesses namely- Randheer @ Monu, Ravindra and Sameer Khan and during the course of trial, all these three witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. It is submitted that to corroborate the allegations, recovery of blood stained iron axe was also shown from the appellant. It is argued that there are no criminal antecedents against the appellant and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that appellant is in custody since 03.03.2023 and further custody of the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made in this appeal, however, he fairly concedes that the aforementioned three witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. 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 on behalf of the victim/complainant to oppose this appeal (bail). 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 parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, the aforementioned three eye-witnesses have been declared hostile by the prosecution, there are no [2025:RJ-JP:37404] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1563/2025] criminal antecedents against the appellant and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion 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. 7. Consequently, this instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.03.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Sunil @ Sullu @ Surendra Son Of Buddharam, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No. 55/2023 registered at Police Station Bhiwadi Phase-III, District Bhiwadi 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 /179