[2026:RJ-JP:991] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2789/2025 Devashish Mahavar S/o Kamar Kishore Mahavar, R/o Gali No. 02 Kumhran Mohalla Mevari Gate Beawar, Police Station Beawar City, District Ajmer. (Presently Confined In Central Jail Ajmer) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Vijay S/o Harish, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Kamal Ji Tal Vale Ka Makan, Sedriya, Beawar, Beawar City, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sunil Tyagi Mr. Sunil Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 09/01/2026 1. Instant appeal under Section 14A of SC/ST (POA) Act is filed by the appellant Devashish Mahawar S/o Shri Kamal Kishore Mahawar in a matter arising out of FIR No. 208/2023 P.S. Beawar City, Ajmer under Sections 302, 143, 147, 149 IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act for seeking bail after dismissal of bail application No.912/2025 under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 of BNSS dated 04.10.2025 by learned Special Judge (SC/ST (POA) Act Cases) Ajmer. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that without observing principle of law learned trial court has arrived at a conclusion of conviction. He further submitted that learned trial court has overlooked [2026:RJ-JP:991] (2 of 6) [CRLAS-2789/2025] material contradictions and discrepancies, which goes to root of the matter. He further submitted that the entire case of prosecution rests on testimony of interested witness and no independent witness was examined to corroborate the story of prosecution. 3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the first bail application of the present appellant was dismissed by this Hon’ble Court on 08.10.2024 and till date the trial has not been concluded. He further submits that vide bail order dated 27.08.2025, the co-accused Sunil Kumar Bhatt has been enlarged on bail, and that the identically placed accused Sunil Kumar Bhatt was released on the ground that the brother of the complainant, who is also an eyewitness, has not supported the case of the prosecution. He further refers to the statement of PW-1 Vijay, who is the brother of the deceased and an eyewitness, and submits that PW-1 has admitted that the present appellant was not involved in the incident. He also refers to the statement of PW-2 Rohit and submits that the main allegation is against Pawan Gujar and not against the present appellant. He further submits that in test identification parade in respect of the present appellant, PW-2 has not identified present appellant. 4. He further refers to the statements of PW-3 Naresh and PW5 Vikas and submits that both the witnesses have been turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. He further refers to the prosecution story and submits that as per the witnesses, no weapon was used and there was only [2026:RJ-JP:991] (3 of 6) [CRLAS-2789/2025] stone pelting, and one of the stones hit the deceased. He further submits that a stone has been recovered at the instance of Pawan Gujar and no recovery has been effected from the present appellant. He also submits that even in the FIR, no specific attribution is made against the present appellant. Lastly, he submits that except the present appellant and Pawan Gujar, all other accused persons have already been enlarged on bail. 5. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by the Learned Public Prosecutor, who submits that on the basis of CCTV footage, the role and involvement of the present appellant has been found. He further submits that the complainant has already been informed by the police about filing of the present bail appeal. 6. Heard Learned Counsel for the appellant and Learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 7. On the basis of a written complaint lodged by PW-1 Vijay, brother of the deceased and an eyewitness, FIR No. 208/2023 was registered at Police Station Beawar, Rajasthan, for offences under Sections 302 and 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against several persons including the present appellant. 8. First appeal for bail was considered by this Court on 08.10.2024 and same was dismissed. Learned Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon the statements of [2026:RJ-JP:991] (4 of 6) [CRLAS-2789/2025] certain prosecution witnesses recorded by the trial court, and this Court has considered the statements so referred. The appellant is in custody since his arrest on 12.03.2023. 9. A Coordinate Bench of this Court has granted bail to co- accused Sunil Kumar Bhatt on the ground that the complainant, who is the brother of the deceased, has not supported the case of the prosecution and has clearly stated in his cross-examination that the appellant was not involved in the commission of the crime. In examination-in-chief, PW- 1 has named Pawan Gujar as the main accused. In cross- examination, PW-1 has admitted that Sunil Bhatt, Veer Pawan, Kamal Babu, Dwarkadheesh, Deva and Devasheesh were not involved in the incident and that their names were mentioned only under pressure of the police. 10. PW-2 Rohit, (injured and eye-witness) was also examined by the prosecution and his statement has been considered, including his cross-examination. PW-3 Naresh and PW-5 Vikas have turned hostile. 11. Though it is not appropriate for this Court to express any opinion on the merits of the evidence at this stage, however, considering the fact that the identically placed accused Sunil Kumar Bhatt has already been released on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.08.2025, and further considering that the main allegation is against Pawan Gujar, this Court is of the view that on the basis of principle of parity, the present appeal deserves to be allowed. [2026:RJ-JP:991] (5 of 6) [CRLAS-2789/2025] 12. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. 13. 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 04.10.2025 is hereby quashed and the appellant accused Devashish Mahavar S/o Kamar Kishore Mahavar, is released on bail till disposal of criminal case arising out of above mentioned FIR with the condition that he would executes 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 1. After release of appellant 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. 2. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed [2026:RJ-JP:991] (6 of 6) [CRLAS-2789/2025] address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 5. In case, the applicant has violated any condition, then the order shall be recalled and cancelled. 14. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 15. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E-mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /33