Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 529 (RAJ)

Sagar Sharma v. State

2020-04-09

DINESH MEHTA

body2020
JUDGMENT Dinesh Mehta, J. - This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in Criminal Misc. Case No.59/2020 (CIS No.32/2020), Special Session Case No.16/2020, pertaining to FIR No.474/2019, Police Station Hiran Magri, District Udaipur for the offences under Section 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby his bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 2. The appellant, in his appeal, has raised basic ground that he has been falsely implicated by the complainant who is 29 years of age and that physical relationship between the appellant and complainant was that of consent and not of force. 3. Mr. Farzand Ali, learned Additional Advocate General-cumGovt. Advocate was not able to satisfactorily repel these contentions. 4. In view of the aforesaid, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be accepted. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 05.03.2020, passed by the learned Special Judge is set aside. Consequent thereof, the bail application filed by the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. before the learned Trial Courtis allowed. The appellant Sagar Sharma S/o Kailash Chandra Sharma, arrested in FIR No.474/2019, Police Station Hiran Magri, Udaipur shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each. 5. This Court is of the view that in the prevailing circumstances of complete lock-down amidst spread of COVID-19, furnishing of two sureties will be difficult on the one hand and the same may pose eminent threat to the concerned. It is, therefore, ordered that the appellant shall be released on bail upon furnishing the personal bond. He may furnish requisite sureties by 1st May, 2020 to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 6. It would be required of the concerned Superintendent of Police/Jailer to apprise the appellant about consequence of violation of the bond as stipulated in Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code, while releasing the appellant on bail. 7. Appellant shall be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. Appellant shall be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. In case, he fails to furnish surety bonds by the stipulated time, the instant order will come to an end automatically.