[2025:RJ-JP:34807] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2155/2025 Deenu S/o Chander, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Bamanwadi, Police Station Jurhara, District Bharatpur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Sateesh S/o Ramswaroop, R/o Village Bamanwadi, Jurhera, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Himmat Singh Bikarwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP Mr. Suresh Kumar Ms. Usha Choudhary Ms. Neema Kaushal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 21/08/2025 1. The instant appeal is filed under Section 14A (2) of SC/ST (POA) Act in a matter arising out of FIR No. 359/2020 at P.S. Jurhera, District Bharatpur for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 302, 307, 427, 452 of IPC and Section 3/25, 6 of Arms Act and Section 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submits that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated. He further submits that neither in FIR nor in any evidence any allegation of firing is made upon the present appellant accused. He also submits that the allegation of causing [2025:RJ-JP:34807] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-2155/2025] injury by gunshot is upon Aasmohammad and not on the present appellant. He also referred order dated 06.04.2021 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench and submitted that two accused Shahid and Vahid were granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the present appellant is seeking parity with them. He further referred order dated 25.07.2025 passed by the trial Court and submitted that 7 persons were granted bail and case of present appellant is not different from those who granted bail. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant has referred the material on record and submitted that this appellant was having firearm with him and he has fired a shot upon mother of complainant which is evident from the video prepared by complainant side. He also submits that the trial Court after considering his role and involvement has dismissed the bail application as his gunshot has hit mother of complainant. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the complainant along with learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 6. On basis of complaint by complainant against 29 named and an unknown persons about assault by firing, the matter is investigated and after investigation initially a charge-sheet has ben filed against Shahid and Vahid by keeping pending against others. Both Shahid and Vahid were granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench on 06.04.2021. Thereafter, the trial Court has granted bail to seven accused persons on 25.07.2025 but dismissed the bail application of present appellant accused. The allegation on present [2025:RJ-JP:34807] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-2155/2025] appellant is firing upon injured Somoti and we have considered the evidence collected by police during investigation. There is no criminal antecedents against the appellant accused. 7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The appeal under Section 14-A SC/ST (PoA) Act is allowed and impugned order dated 25.07.2025 is hereby quashed qua present-applicant and the appellant accused Deenu S/o Chander is released on bail till disposal of criminal case arising out of above mentioned FIR with the condition that he would execute a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of ₹25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in trial court on date fixed by trial court and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- (i). After release of appellant accused on bail, he will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. (ii). That he will appear before the trial Court on each and every date of hearing till the disposal of criminal case. (iii). That if the appellant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court. (iv). Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. [2025:RJ-JP:34807] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-2155/2025] (v). The appellant shall not influence prosecution witnesses in any manner. 8. Misc. Applications, if any, stands disposed of. 9. A copy of this order be sent through E-mail to the trial court. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/292