[2025:RJ-JP:38526] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2407/2025 Govind Jaiswani @ Rinku Son Of Shrichand Jaiswani, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of House No. 180, Sindhi Colony, Police Sta- tion Kishorepura, Kota, Presently Residing At House No. 253, Basant Vihar, Police Station Dadabari, Kota City, (Presently The Accused Appellant Is Confined In Central Jail Kota Since 25.08.2025) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor. 2. Gajraj Nayak Son Of Shri Ratan Singh, Resident Of House No. 401, Basant Vihar, Keshavpura, Near Mukti Dham, Po- lice Station Dadabari, District Kota City. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vijay Sharma with Mr. Sanjeev Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/09/2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 25.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (Raj.) in Bail Application (CIS) No. 152/2025 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.262/2025 registered at Police Station Mahaveer Nagar, District Kota City (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2) & 110 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in [2025:RJ-JP:38526] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-2407/2025] short ‘BNS’) 2023. Investigation is being conducted for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 110, 117(2) & 3(5) of BNS and Section 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 there is omnibus allegation against the appellant. Counsel submits that except one grievous injury, all other injuries sustained to the injured are simple in nature. Counsel submits that there is one criminal antecedents of the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 279 & 336 of IPC wherein he is on bail. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that appellant is in custody since 25.08.2025 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. He submits that victim/complainant has duly been informed about hearing of this appeal (bail). 4. Despite information, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the victim/complainant to oppose the prayer for bail made in this appeal. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. 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; [2025:RJ-JP:38526] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-2407/2025] nature of injuries; 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. 7. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 25.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (Raj.) in Bail Application (CIS) No. 152/2025 is set aside. It is ordered that the accused- appellant Govind Jaiswani @ Rinku Son Of Shrichand Jaiswani arrested in connection with FIR No.262/2025 registered at Police Station Mahaveer Nagar, District Kota City (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. 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 /185