[2025:RJ-JP:33801] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2249/2025 Mohit Saini S/o Ramsingh Saini, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Imli Wala Kuan, Tijara, Police Station Tijara, District Khairthal-Tijara, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined At Central Jail, Alwar). ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Ravi Kumar S/o Raju, R/o 459, Ward No. 08, Harijan Mo- halla, Dharmapura, Bijawar, Chhatarpur, Madhya Pradesh, India. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Gautam Bhadadra For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, PP Mr. Devanshu Saini HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 26/08/2025 1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 19.07.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar (Raj.) in Bail Application No.238/2025 (CIS No.208/2025) rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.181/2025 registered at Police Station Tijara, District Bhiwadi (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of [2025:RJ-JP:33801] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-2249/2025] Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that false case of murder has been registered against the appellant. It is submitted that mother of the complainant expired in an accident. Counsel submits that complainant- Ravi Kumar and witness namely- Pintu Kumar have been examined during the course of trial wherein they have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the appellant and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that appellant is in custody since 09.04.2025 and 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 opposes the prayer of bail made in this appeal. However, they fairly concede that complainant- Ravi Kumar and witness namely- Pintu Kumar have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned Public Prosecutor. 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 the parties, especially considering the fact that complainant and witness namely- Pintu Kumar have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile, as also considering the [2025:RJ-JP:33801] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-2249/2025] fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the appellant and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, 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, the instant appeal is allowed. 6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 19.07.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar (Raj.) in Bail Application No.238/2025 (CIS No.208/2025) is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Mohit Saini S/o Ramsingh Saini arrested in connection with FIR No.181/2025 registered at Police Station Tijara, District Bhiwadi (Rajasthan), 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. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant appeal (bail) and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /239