[2025:RJ-JP:36773] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1843/2025 Govind Das Vaishnav S/o Rameshwar Prasad Vaishnav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o House No.32 Ajeet Nagar Rampura Road, Sanganer, Police Station Muhana, Jaipur Raj. (At Present Confiend In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Raj., Through PP 2. Smt. Priyanaka Verma W/o Shri Tarachand Verma, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Plot No. 9 Kailashpuri Colony, Rampura Road, Police Station Muhana Sanganer, Jaipur ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. Mr. Gaurav Kumawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 10/09/2025 1. This instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 05.07.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in Bail Application No.136/2025 (CIS No.1332/2025) rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.1377/2023 registered at Police Station Muhana, District Jaipur City (South) for offences under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506 & 120B of IPC and Sections 3(1)(c), 3(1)(d), 3(1)(r) & 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [2025:RJ-JP:36773] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1843/2025] (Amendment 2015). Investigation is being conducted for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of IPC and Section 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. Learned counsel submits that no case under the Atrocities Act is made out as there is land dispute between the parties and in this regard, a civil suit is pending between them. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that appellant is in custody since 30.06.2025 and further custody of the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail made in this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that appellant is the key person and there is allegation against him of preparing forged documents of the plot and using the same. 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 fact that there is land dispute between the parties and in this regard, a civil suit is pending between them before the Civil Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on [2025:RJ-JP:36773] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1843/2025] 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 05.07.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jaipur Metropolitan-I is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Govind Das Vaishnav S/o Rameshwar Prasad Vaishnav, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No.1377/2023 registered at Police Station Muhana, District Jaipur City (South), 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 /269