[2025:RJ-JP:41976] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 262/2025 Bahadur Son Of Ram Singh, Resident Of Bhagatpura Gudla Police Station Sadar Karauli District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail, Karauli) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Smt. Vimla Wife Of Samay Singh, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of Bhagatpura (Gudla) District Karauli (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP with Mr. Anirudh Singh Mr. Babu Lal Bairwa HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 14/10/2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A SC/ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No. 150/2024 Police Station Sadar Karauli District Karauli for the offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 333, 103(2) BNS and Sections 3(1)(R)(s), 3(2)(va) and 3(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that a false and fabricated case has been made out against the appellant. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time to conclude. Moreover, there is single criminal antecedent registered against the appellant. [2025:RJ-JP:41976] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-262/2025] Furthermore, it is submitted that post- mortem report has not reflected any injury on the head, as alleged in the FIR. Additionally, there are improvements in the statements tendered by the Rakhi, Krishna and Bimla. It is also submitted that appellant has been in custody for a prolonged period. Additionally, it is submitted that co-accused- Ramjeet has been granted bail vide order dated 17.01.2025 under akin factual narratives. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor along with counsel for the complainant have opposed the appeal and have drawn attention of this Court on the contents of the FIR, wherein specific allegations are leveled against the appellant. Moreover, counsel has drawn attention of the Court on the postmortem report of the deceased, wherein opinion of the Medical Board suggests that death has occurred due to the multiple injuries caused by the blunt weapon and massive hemorrhage/shock. 4. Learned counsel has also relied upon the injury report of the Rekha, Krishna and Bimla. Furthermore, it is submitted that weapon used by the appellant was a stick/latthi and the injuries qua the person is of akin nature and are same. Lastly, it is submitted that complainant has been threatened to withdraw the case. 5. Having heard and considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the fact that postmortem report has reflected that death has occurred due to the multiple injuries; that there are specific allegations leveled against the appellant, therefore, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without [2025:RJ-JP:41976] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-262/2025] commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is not inclined to allow the appeal and enlarge him on bail. 6. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja/304