Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19459 (RAJ)

DEEPAK PRAJAPATI S/O RAMPRASAD v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLAS/2965/2025 · 2026-01-16

Ganesh Ram Meena

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:1807] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2965/2025 Deepak Prajapati S/o Ramprasad, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Lanka Colony Baran, Police Station - Kotwali Baran, District Baran (Raj.) (Presently Confined In District Jail Baran) ----Appellant Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through PP 2. Shri Rambabu S/o Shri Gopal Lal, R/o Kota Road, Krishna Nagar Baran, Kotwali Baran, Baran (Raj.) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Buddhi Prakash Meena For Respondent(s) : Ms. Aarti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 16/01/2026 1. This criminal appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant u/S 14(A) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act assailing the order dated 30.10.2025, passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Baran in criminal misc. application No. 307/2025, filed by the accused-appellant u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 23/2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali Baran, District Baran for offences u/S 307, 323, 341, 504, 147, 148, 149 & 384 IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the application filed by the accused-appellant was dismissed. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the complainant/victim has already been intimated about the filing [2026:RJ-JP:1807] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-2965/2025] and hearing of this criminal appeal through the SHO of concerned police station. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accused appellant has not been named in the FIR. He also submits that in the FIR the complainant has stated that there are two eye witnesses of the incident namely; Mahaveer and Hariprakash. He further submits that co-accused Rohit @ Bafla and Tej Singh @ Teja have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the case of the present appellant is in no manner distinguishable from the case of the aforestated co-accused persons. Counsel also submits that the accused appellant is in custody since 23.08.2025 and the trial will take its own time. It is also submitted that looking to the evidence available on record, there are bleak chances of conviction of the accused appellant. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor, while opposing this criminal appeal and submits that the allegation against the accused appellant is of serious and grave nature i.e. of inflicting injuries by knife. 5. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the challan papers including the statements of the eye witnesses namely Mahaveer and Hariprakash recorded u/S 164 CrPC and so also the statements of complainant witness Rambabu-PW-1 recorded during his examination before the trial Court. 6. The cause of death of the deceased Kartik @ Pankaj is the injury on abdomen by the sharp object. On perusal of the evidence of the complainant witness Rambabu (PW-1), the said fatal injury has not been attributed to the accused appellant. The accused appellant has not been named in the FIR and in the [2026:RJ-JP:1807] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-2965/2025] statements of the witnesses namely Mahaveer and Hariprakash recorded u/S 164 CrPC also, there is no allegations against the accused appellant. The co-accused Rohit @ Bafla and Tej Singh @ Teja have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the case of the present accused appellant is in no manner distinguishable from the case of the co-accused who have been enlarged on bail. It has also come out that the accused appellant Deepak Prajapati has not been seen in the CCTV footage of the alleged incident. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the accused appellant and the observations made above and to maintain parity, this Court deems that the accused appellant deserves to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed under Section 14(A) of SC/ST Act is allowed and order dated 30.10.2025, passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Baran in criminal misc. application No. 307/2025 is set aside. It is directed that appellant shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.23/2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali Baran, District Baran, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /1