High CourtsSingle Bench

Vishal Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan And Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 9 September 2022 · Citation: (2022) 09 RAJ CK 0025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Garg, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(2)(Va), 3(2)(V), 14A · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366, 376(2)(N) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1258 Of 2022
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

7 paragraphs · 407 words

Manoj Kumar Garg, J

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.189/2022, Police Station Mahila Thana Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 & 376(2)(N) of the IPC and Sections 3(2)(Va) & 3(2)(V) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Court, Hanumangarh, whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that firstly a Missing Person Report was registered in which, prosecutrix was recovered on 05.05.2022 and she clearly mentioned that she went along with the appellant at her own free will. Later on, FIR in this case was lodged after 1.5 month of the registration of the Missing Person Report. Challan of the case has already been presented. A compromise has arrived between the parties. The appellant is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant. The learned court below has grossly erred in law and facts as well in declining to release the appellant on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the complainant concurs the fact of compromise.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material available on record.

Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar, this Court is of the opinion that the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 01.08.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ ST Court, Hanumangarh, is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant, Vishal Kumar S/o Jagdish Kumar, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.189/2022, Police Station Mahila Thana Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 50,000/- 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.