High CourtsSingle Bench

Jeet Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 19 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 RAJ CK 0058

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Castes And the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 — Section 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(v), 14A · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 1600 Of 2020
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

17 paragraphs · 365 words
1.

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment

Act, 2015 (for short ""the Act of 2015""). The appellant has been arrested in connection with FIR No.115/2020 registered at Police Station Malarna

Dungar, District Sawai Madhopur for the offence (s) under Section(s) 376 IPC & under Sections 3(1)(w)(ii), & 3(2)(v) of the Act of 2015.

2.

It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case as is apparent from the contents of the

FIR as well as the statement of the prosecutrix, aged about 32 years, recorded under Section 164 CrPC. He submits that the appellant is in custody

since 17.08.2020, charge-sheet has already been filed, trial of the case will take time, he has no criminal antecedents of like nature and prays for his

release on bail.

3.

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposing the appeal submitted that there is grave allegation against the

petitioner of subjecting her to rape and blackmailing and hence, he does not deserve indulgence of bail.

4.

Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by learned counsels for the respective parties, the nature of allegation against the appellant, his

length of custody and especially the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of CrPC; but, without expressing any opinion on the

merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail.

5.

The order dated 16.10.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Cases, Sawai Madhopur is quashed and set- aside and the appeal

is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-appellant Jeet Ram S/o Ghanshyam shall be released on bail provided he 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 of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred,

on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.