Ramesh vs State Of Rajasthan And Others

Farjand Ali, J

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.287/2023, Police Station Gogunda, District Udaipur for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 376-D of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and being aggrieved by the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur in Criminal Misc. Bail Case No.337/2023, whereby the application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the trial Court.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Expeditious culmination of trial is not a seeming fate and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the appellant behind the bars. He, therefore, prays that benefit of bail may be granted to the appellant.

Per contra, learned learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.

There is a delay in lodging of the FIR. The same got lodged after eight days of the incident, for which, no satisfactory explanation has been furnished. The victim is a major lady and married to one Keshu Lal. Now, the parties have resolved the dispute. Even, the learned counsel for the complainant is agreeable to grant the bail to the petitioner Thus, it would not be justifiable to keep the appellant behind the bar looking to the fact that early culmination of the trial is not a seeming fate. In this background and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant, named in the cause title, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties 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.