Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 2234 (RAJ)

Ram Lakhan Disaniya v. State of Rajasthan

2023-12-13

MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

body2023
JUDGMENT : Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - SB Criminal Appeal Nos.868/2022 & 776/2022:- The present appeals have been filed by the appellants under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment Act, 2015) (for brevity "the Act of 1989") apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.283/2019 registered at Police Station Banipark, District Jaipur (West) for the offence (s) under Section(s) 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120-B & 109 IPC & Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants, inviting attention of this Court towards the contents of the FIR No.17/2019 dated 02.07.2019 lodged by the respondent No.2/complainant-Dr. Vinod Bathara alongwith other persons as also the contents of the instant FIR No.283/2019 dated 11.09.2019, would submit that for the same incident, he has lodged two FIRs. She submits that in the earlier FIR No.17/2019, after their arrest, they have already been extended benefit of regular bail under Section 439 CrPC. She submits that the subsequent FIR is abuse of the process of law. She further submits that the FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989. She, therefore, prays for benefit of pre-arrest bail for the appellants. 3. Although, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant opposed the prayer; but, could not dispute that for the allegations levelled in the instant FIR, the complainant has already lodged the FIR No.17/2019 wherein, the appellants were arrested. It is also not disputed that the FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989. 4. Heard. Considered. 5. Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and the material on record which reflects that the instant FIR contains the same allegations which were levelled in the FIR No.17/2019 and this FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellants on pre-arrest bail. 6. The orders dated 09.05.2022 & 29.04.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur are quashed and set-aside and these appeals are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-appellants 1.Ram Lakhan Disaniya S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Disaniya & 2. 6. The orders dated 09.05.2022 & 29.04.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur are quashed and set-aside and these appeals are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-appellants 1.Ram Lakhan Disaniya S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Disaniya & 2. Neha Jain D/o Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction on the following conditions:- (i). that the appellants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii). that the appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and (iii). that the appellants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. SB Criminal Appeal Nos.793/2022 & 1085/2022:- 7. The present appeals have been filed by the appellants under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment Act, 2015) (for brevity "the Act of 1989") apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.287/2019 registered at Police Station Banipark, District Jaipur (West) for the offence (s) under Section(s) 409, 389, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120, 120-B & 109 IPC & Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants, inviting attention of this Court towards the contents of the FIR No.17/2019 dated 02.07.2019 lodged by the respondent No.2/complainant-Dr. Vinod Bathara alongwith other persons as also the contents of the instant FIR No.287/2019 dated 13.09.2019, would submit that for the same incident, he has lodged two FIRs. She submits that in the earlier FIR No.17/2019, after their arrest, they have already been extended benefit of regular bail under Section 439 CrPC. She submits that the subsequent FIR is abuse of the process of law. She further submits that the FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989. She, therefore, prays for benefit of pre-arrest bail for the appellants. 9. She submits that the subsequent FIR is abuse of the process of law. She further submits that the FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989. She, therefore, prays for benefit of pre-arrest bail for the appellants. 9. Although, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant opposed the prayer; but, could not dispute that for the allegations levelled in the instant FIR, the complainant has already lodged the FIR No.17/2019 wherein, the appellants were arrested. It is also not disputed that the FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989. 10. Heard. Considered. 11. Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and the material on record which reflects that the instant FIR contains the same allegations which were levelled in the FIR No.17/2019 and this FIR is bereft of any allegation to constitute an offence under the Act of 1989; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellants on pre-arrest bail. 12. The orders dated 29.04.2022 & 09.05.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur are quashed and set-aside and these appeals are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-appellants 1. Neha Jain D/o Late Shri Ashok Kumar Jain & 2. Ram Lakhan Disaniya S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Disaniya shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction on the following conditions:- (i). that the appellants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii). that the appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and (iii). that the appellants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.