Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 540 (RAJ)

Dayala Ram v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-02-16

RAMESHWAR VYAS

body2022
JUDGMENT Rameshwar Vyas, J. - Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the notice upon the respondent No. 2-complainant has been served. a copy of the served notice produced by the learned Public Prosecutor is taken on record. 2. Despite service, nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2-complainant. 3. The instant criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14a(2) of the S.C./S.T. (Prevention of atrocities) act, 2015 on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No. 618/2021, Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh for the offences under Sections 323, 143, 341, 325, 307 & 427 of I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(Va) & 3(2)(V) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of atrocities) amendment act, 2015 against the Order dated 15.01.2022 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of atrocities) act Cases, Hanumangarh, whereby the bail application preferred under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that exaggerated allegations have been made by the respondent No. 2-complainant in the first information report against Dayalaram, Purnaram, their wives, Mohanlal and Sahabram. However, the police has filed charge-sheet only against Dayalaram @ Deendayal. He further submits that in the statement of injured Krishnalal, the allegation that Dayalaram inflicted head injury by axe has not been substantiated by the injury report. No injury by sharp weapon has been found in the injury report of injured Krishnalal. He further submits that at the time of alleged incident, Krishnalal was in drunken state, who has also levelled false allegations. There is no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet has already been filed. The trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in the near future. The appellant is behind the bar since 29.12.2021. On the above grounds, learned counsel for the appellant prays that the appeal of the appellant may be allowed and he may be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal. 7. Having regard to the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties as well as facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be accepted. 8. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal. 7. Having regard to the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties as well as facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be accepted. 8. Consequently, the instant criminal appeal is allowed. The impugned Order dated 15.01.2022 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of atrocities) act Cases, Hanumangarh is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant - Dayala Ram @ Deendayal S/o Hardwari arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 618/2021, Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees: One Lac Only) and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.