[2026:RJ-JP:11906] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 206/2026 Imran Pinara S/o Taj Mohammad @ Tajuddin Mansuri, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Indra Colony, Devliya Kalan, Police Station Bhinai, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Ramlal Bhanbhi S/o Narayan, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Govliya, Bhinai, Ajmer. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ayush Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Order 19/03/2026 1. The present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14 A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by accused- appellant-Imran Pinara S/o Taj Mohammad @ Tajuddin Mansuri being aggrieved by the order dated 20.01.2026 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Ajmer in criminal misc. case No. 79/2026, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant in connection with FIR No. 292/2025 dated 07.12.2025 registered at Police Station Bhinai, District Ajmer for offence under Sections 189(2), 109(1) and 333 of BNS, 2023 under Sections 3/25 of the Arms Act and under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. [2026:RJ-JP:11906] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-206/2026] 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been arrested in connection with the impugned FIR on the allegation that he opened fire upon the complainant. Learned counsel further submitted that the entire case is false and baseless as police registered three FIRs at the same police station bearing Nos.292/2025, 293/2025 and 294/2025 on the same day. Learned counsel further submitted that, as pointed out by the Investigating Officer present before this Court, the allegations in all the three FIRs are similar in nature, alleging use of a firearm and on that basis the FIRs were registered against the appellant. Learned counsel further submitted that, apart from these three FIRs dated 07.12.2025, the appellant has one criminal case under Section 379 IPC of the year 2023 and one case under the Arms Act of the year 2022 and, thereafter, there are no criminal antecedents of any nature and all of a sudden three FIRs have been registered on the same day. In view thereof, learned counsel for the appellant prayed that he has been falsely implicated, so he be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail applications and informed this Court that service upon the complainant/victim is complete, however, no one has appeared on behalf of complainant. 4. This Court called the Investigating Officer to explain how three FIRs were registered on the same day. The Investigating Officer informed that the appellant allegedly used a firearm at three different places namely i.e. Vishrambari, Ekalsingha and Rohillakalla and, therefore, three separate FIRs were registered. On a further query made by this Court as to what was recovered [2026:RJ-JP:11906] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-206/2026] from all the three places, the Investigating Officer informed that one round was recovered at the first place namely Vishrambari, for which the FIR bearing No.292/2025 was registered, however, no bullet or other incriminating material was recovered at the other two places for which the FIRs bearing Nos. 293/2025 and 294/2025 were registered under the Arms Act. This Court interacting with the Investigating Officer and hearing the learned Public Prosecutor, noted that no recovery of firearm, bullet etc. has been made from the alleged places. However, as the investigation in the FIR is still pending, this Court refrain itself to make any observation in that regard and inclined to enlarge the present appellant on bail. 5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case the fact that no specific act has been assigned to the appellants, without commenting upon merits/demerits of the matter, this Court is inclined to exercise its power under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-appellant on bail. 6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 20.01.2026 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Ajmer is set aside and it is ordered that the accused-appellant Imran Pinara S/o Taj Mohammad @ Tajuddin Mansuri arrested in connection with the aforesaid FIR shall be released on bail; 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 [2026:RJ-JP:11906] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-206/2026] completion of the trial. The appellant is further directed not to take undue advantage or misuse of liberty granted by this Court. It is made clear that the observations, as made by this Court in the appeal, will not affect the trial of the case. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J Dushyant/122