Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 336 (RAJ)

Asif v. State of Rajasthan

2025-02-13

KULDEEP MATHUR

body2025
ORDER : (KULDEEP MATHUR, J.) These appeals have been filed under Section 14A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellants, who are in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.460/2024, registered at Police Station Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 331(6), 109(1), 110, 115(2), 127(2), 324(6), 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)(va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the orders dated 13.11.2024, 19.10.2024, 16.10.2024 and 13.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sri Ganganagar whereby, the bail applications preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellants were rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record. 3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR and the challan papers submitted by the Investigating Agency before the competent criminal Court, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in the alleged incident, which occurred on 12.09.2024, the injuries allegedly inflicted by the appellants upon the injured Jugal Kishore are simple in nature whereas, the injuries allegedly inflicted upon the injured Madan Lal are though grievous in nature but the same are neither on the vital body part of the injured nor are dangerous to life. 4. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants are in judicial custody; the blunt weapon (lathis) allegedly used in commission of the crime have already recovered by the investigating agency; challan has already been filed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-appellants. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail applications. Learned counsel submitted that in the alleged incident, which occurred on 12.09.2024, the appellants have mercilessly beaten the injured persons and have caused more than 15 injuries to each of the injured persons. Learned counsel submitted that looking to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present appellants, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, they were not in a position to refute the facts that the injuries allegedly inflicted by the appellants upon the injured are neither on the vital body parts of the injured persons nor the same are dangerous to life. However, they were not in a position to refute the facts that the injuries allegedly inflicted by the appellants upon the injured are neither on the vital body parts of the injured persons nor the same are dangerous to life. They were also not in a position to refute the fact that the investigation against the appellants has already been completed. 6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the appellants on bail. 7. Consequently, these instant appeals are allowed. The impugned orders dated 13.11.2024, 19.10.2024, 16.10.2024 and 13.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sri Ganganagar are set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellants (1) Pankaj Saini S/o Jai Prakash, (2) Asif S/o Mustak Khan, (3) Rajaram @ Raju Silu S/o Narayan Ram, (4) Pradeep Kumar S/o Ramprakash, (5) Salman S/o Peeru Khan, (6) Vishal S/o Krishanlal and (7) Vijay S/o Bhadarram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.460/2024, registered at Police Station Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of appeals. The trial Court shall not get prejudiced by the same. 9. A copy of this order be placed in each file.