[2025:RJ-JP:33268] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2149/2025 1. Sitaram Mewada Son Of Nathulal Mewada, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Shankarpura, Naya Nohara, Police Station Borkheda, Kota. (At Present In Central Jail, Kota) 2. Tulsiram Mewada Son Of Nathulal Mewada, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Hanuman Ji Ki Gali Naya Nohara, Police Station Borkheda, Kota. (At Present In Central Jail, Kota.) 3. Surendra Bairwa Son Of Revdilal, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Village Gavdi, Police Station Budhadeet, District Kota, At Present Resident Of Tenant House Of Rohit Rathor, Naya Nohara, Shankarpura, Police Station Borkheda, Kota. ( At Present In Central Jail, Kota) ----Appellants Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Swami Singh Nayak Son Of Shri Ramswaroop Nayak, Resident Of 71-B, Ambika Aawas Baran Road, Borkhera, Kota City (Raj.) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Om Prakash Pareek For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Ravindra Paliwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 22/08/2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 01.08.2025 passed by learned Special Court, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (Raj.) in Bail Application (CIS) No.134/2025, CNR No.RJKT070003622025 rejecting the bail [2025:RJ-JP:33268] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-2149/2025] application preferred on behalf of the appellants, who are in custody in connection with FIR No.216/2025 registered at Police Station Borkhera, District Kota City (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 110 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Sections 3(1) (r) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that parties have resolved their dispute amicably. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the appellants of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that appellants are in custody since 28.07.2025 and further custody of the appellants would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, GA-cum-AAG as well as learned Public Prosecutor oppose the prayer of bail made in this appeal. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise and submits that complainant has no objection if this criminal appeal (bail) is allowed and appellants are released on 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 fact that parties have resolved their dispute amicably, as also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the appellants of similar nature and trial will [2025:RJ-JP:33268] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-2149/2025] take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellants on bail. 7. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 01.08.2025 passed by learned Special Court, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (Raj.) in Bail Application (CIS) No.134/2025, CNR No.RJKT070003622025 is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellants (1) Sitaram Mewada Son Of Nathulal Mewada, (2) Tulsiram Mewada Son Of Nathulal Mewada and (3) Surendra Bairwa Son Of Revdilal arrested in connection with FIR No.216/2025 registered at Police Station Borkhera, District Kota City (Rajasthan), shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes 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 would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /149