Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3799 (RAJ)

RAJENDRA @KALU S/O SATNAM SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLAS/162/2025 · 2025-03-07

Anil Kumar Upman

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:10517] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 162/2025 Rajendra @kalu S/o Satnam Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Desula Khod, Police Station Udyog Nagar, Alwar District Alwar (Appellant Is In Judicial Custody In Central Jail Alwar) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Victim, R/o ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/03/2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A (2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 28.11.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar (Raj.) in Bail Application No. 585/2024 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.227/2024 registered at Police Station Udyog Nagar, District Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323 & 341 of IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341 & 302 of IPC & Sections 3(2)(va) & 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018. [2025:RJ-JP:10517] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-162/2025] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that as per charge-sheet, alleged incident took place in spur of the moment. It is submitted that maximum allegation against the appellant is that he pushed the deceased due to which he fell down and sustained injury on his head. According to the post- mortem report, cause of death is coma brought about as a result of ante mortem head injury mentioned as injury No.1 i.e., diffuse swelling present over right parieto-temporo-occipital region. There are no criminal antecedents against the appellant. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Appellant is in custody since 06.06.2024 and further custody of the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer of bail made in this appeal, however, he fairly concedes that maximum allegation against the appellant is that he pushed the deceased. He further submits that complainant/victim of this case has duly been informed about hearing of this appeal. 4. Despite information no one has put in appearance on behalf of victim/complainant to oppose 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 both the parties, so also considering the material made available before me in the form of charge-sheet; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion; absence of criminal antecedents as well as looking [2025:RJ-JP:10517] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-162/2025] to the custody period, 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 28.11.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar (Raj.) is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant- Rajendra @kalu S/o Satnam Singh, arrested in connection with FIR No. 227/2024 registered at Police Station Udyog Nagar, District Alwar, 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 observation made herein above is only for decision of the instant appeal and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /221