High CourtsSingle Bench

Govind Kumar And Others vs State Of Rajasthan And Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 3 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 RAJ CK 0022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kuldeep Mathur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(2)(v)(va), 14A(2) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 344, 342, 366, 370, 376(2)(n), 382, 384, 420, 467, 468 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 177, 686 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 498 words

Kuldeep Mathur, J

The instant appeals have been filed under Section 14-A (2) SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellants, who are in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.343/2023, registered at Police Station Rishabhadev, District Udaipur, for the offences under Sections 342, 366, 382, 384, 323, 343, 344, 370, 376(2)(n), 420, 467, 468 & 120B of IPC and Section 3(2)(v)(va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the orders dated 20.03.2024 & 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Attrocities) Cases, Udaipur, whereby, the bail applications preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellants were rejected.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the present case.

Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR & Challan Papers, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the marriage of the complainant’s daughter was solemnized with one Kheta Ram and thereafter the daughter of the complainant remained in the company of Kheta Ram for more than two months out of her free will and violation. Learned counsel submitted that the appellants have played no role in commission of the alleged offences. Learned counsel submitted that the appellants are in judicial custody; the investigation has already been completed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to be concluded, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellants.

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bails.

Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the prosecution, the appellants cooperated in getting the complainant’s daughter married with Kheta Ram. This Court prima facie also finds that there is no allegation of forcible sexual assault-rape against the present appellants levelled by the prosecrutix in her statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. This Court also prima facie finds that no recovery is due to be effected from the appellants and the investigation has already been completed. This Court, thus, is of the opinion that the orders rejecting the applications for bail filed on behalf of the appellants, cannot be sustained and deserve to be set aside.

Consequently, the instant appeals are allowed. The impugned orders dated 20.03.2024 & 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Women Atrocities Cases), Udaipur are set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellants Govind Kumar S/o Shri Vakta & Rahul Kumar S/o Shri Bankaram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.343/2023, registered at Police Station Rishabhadev, District Udaipur shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnish 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.