HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 203/2025 Ramdhan Prajapat Son Of Mahadev Prasad Prajapat, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Kheda Raniwas, Police Station Kotkhawada District Jaipur (Accused Appellant Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Mool Chand Meena Son Of Jivan Ram Meena, Resident Of Gram Ramchandrapura Kotkhawda, Jaipur City (South) Jaipur Rajasthan ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP Mr. Aniroodh Mathur Mr. Naman Yadav HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 10/02/2025 1. This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the SC/ST Act’) has been filed on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Jaipur Metro First (hereinafter to be referred as ‘trial court’) in Criminal Misc. Case No.292/2024 (CIS No. 2619/2024), whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant. 2. The appellant has been arrested in FIR No. 388/2023 of Police Station Kothkhawda District Jaipur City (South) for the offences (2 of 4) [CRLAS-203/2025] punishable under Section 306 of IPC and Section 3(2) (V) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no reliable evidence to the fact that soon before the death of the deceased, she was instigated or abated to commit suicide by the petitioner. It is also contended that no suicidal note was recovered, the cause of the death of the deceased was due to hanging. It is also argued that prior to the present incident another report was submitted by the complainant against Ramkesh, later on, in the statement rendered under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix (Deceased) name of the present petitioner was also shown in committing rape with the prosecutrix (Deceased). In that case, the petitioner was enlarged on bail vide order dated 05.04.2024. It is also argued that the complainant is having land dispute with the petitioner and false FIR was lodged against the petitioner alleging commission of rape. It is also contended that the said FIR was lodged on 21.11.2023 and the petitioner was arrested approximately after one year of the incident. It is further contended that after investigation police has charge-sheeted the accused- petitioner under Section 306 of IPC. The petitioner is behind the bars since long, the trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. It is contended that the prosecutrix died in a suspicious circumstances. It is also contended that prior to the incident on 11.11.2023, a (3 of 4) [CRLAS-203/2025] complaint was lodged under Section 107 Cr.P.C. against the persons namely Raju, Mahadev, Ram Sahai, Ramkishan and Jagdish, in which it was specifically mentioned that they were forcing the complainant to enter into the compromise in relation to FIR No. 319/2023, wherein the deceased has alleged commission of rape. It is contended that all the persons named in the complaint are relatives of the present accused-petitioner. In the present FIR, the complaint has categorically stated that accused-petitioner were forcing and threatening the complainant party and due to that deceased committed suicide, therefore, considering the above aspect, the instant appeal of the accused-petitioner deserves to be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused the material available on the record. 6. It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case. According to the factual report, the deceased committed suicide by hanging, there is no suicidal note left by the deceased, therefore, considering the period of incarceration of the accused- petitioner and taking note that the further trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, I deem it just and proper to allow the appeal filed by the accused appellant under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act. 7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act is allowed and the order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Jaipur Metro First in Criminal Misc. Case No. 292/2024 (CIS No. 2619/2024) is hereby set aside. It is ordered that the accused petitioner Ramdhan Prajapat Son Of Mahadev Prasad Prajapat, in connection with FIR NO. (4 of 4) [CRLAS-203/2025] 388/2023, registered at police station Kotkhawda, District Jaipur City (South), shall be enlarged on bail provided a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J ashu /12