[2025:RJ-JP:38958] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2236/2025 Ikbal Son Of Salim, Resident Of Jamalpur, Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli (Raj.) (Raj.) (At Present Petitioner Is Confined In Sub Jail Hindaun) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan-State, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Vishnu Son Of Hari, Aged About 21 Years, Resident Of Ja- malpur, Police Station Sadar Hindauncity, District Karauli (Raj.) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Malkhan Chaturvedi For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. Mr. Narendra Prasad Meena HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/09/2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 04.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Karauli (Raj.) in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 91/2025, CIS No.91/2025 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.51/2025 registered at Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, [2025:RJ-JP:38958] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-2236/2025] 1989 (Amendment 2015). After completion of investigating police filed charge-sheet against the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(2), 118(1) & 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) 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. Counsel submits that injuries sustained to the injured are simple in nature. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that appellant is in custody since 10.02.2025 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. They submit that entire incident has been captured in the CCTV wherein appellant is visible. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record. 5. 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 injuries sustained to the injured are simple in nature; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter and trial will 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 appellant on bail. [2025:RJ-JP:38958] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-2236/2025] 6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 04.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Karauli (Raj.) in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 91/2025, CIS No.91/2025 is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Ikbal Son Of Salim arrested in connection with FIR No.51/2025 registered at Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli (Rajasthan), shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he 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. 7. 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 /173