[2025:RJ-JP:3276] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2576/2024 Sunitabai W/o Narendra, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Sahariay Basti, Ranibadod, Police Station Kishanganj District Baran (Currently In Judicial Custody At District Jail Baran) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Shri Durga Shankar Sahariya S/o Shri Prabhulal Sahariya, R/o Ranibarod, Kishanganj, District Baran ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jagdish Nagar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Shafat Rahim Khan, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/01/2025 1. This instant appeal has been filed under Section 14(2)(A) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 04.09.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Baran in Bail Application No.248/2024 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.167/2024 registered at Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran for the offences under Sections 115(2), 103(1) & 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Charge-sheet has been filed for offences under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 333 & 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. [2025:RJ-JP:3276] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-2576/2024] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that false allegations have been levelled against the appellant. Learned counsel argues that as per the FIR, the deceased was in drunken condition at the time of alleged incident and was abusing on road, upon which, Narendra S/o Shri Ghansilal and Narendra S/o Shri Shiv Narayan came there and asked him not to do such thing. There occurred a scuffle between them in which, the accused persons gave beatings to him with kicks and fist blows. It was also alleged in the FIR that Sunita, W/o Narendra assaulted him with a wooden stick. Learned counsel thus, urges that the alleged incident happened at the spur of moment. The deceased was in drunken condition. No deadly weapon was used in the alleged incident. No external mark of injury is seen on the dead body. As per post-mortem report, cause of death is hemorrhagic shock due to rupture of spleen and internal bleeding. The appellant has no criminal antecedents and she is in custody since 31.08.2024. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion. 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 oppose the prayer of bail made in this appeal. 4. Heard. 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 both the parties as also looking to the fact that appellant who is a lady, [2025:RJ-JP:3276] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-2576/2024] has no criminal antecedents; the deceased was in drunken condition and was using abusive language on road; the incident occurred at the spur of moment; no deadly weapon was used in commission of the crime; she is in custody since 31.08.2024 and trial will take time in its conclusion, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail. 6. Consequently, these instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 04.09.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Baran is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Sunitabai W/o Narendra, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No. 167/2024 registered at Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided she 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. 7. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of this appeal and would not prejudice trial in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /338