Allowed

Nathu Singh v. State

Rajasthan HC3 Oct 2018CRLAS/1073/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, setting aside the trial court's bail rejection. It directed the release of the appellants on bail with a monetary bond and sureties, citing that they were not named in the FIR or statement of the victim, though merits were not adjudicated. No precedents were cited.

What did the court decide?

The order dismissing bail was set aside; appellants directed to be released on bail upon execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.

Nathu Singh Vs State — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1073/2018

¶3

Nathu Singh S/o Khuman Singh, Aged About 46 Years,

¶4

Lalit Singh S/o Kan Singh Solanki, Aged About 25 Years, Both by caste Solanki Rajput, R/o Dob, Panarva, Police Station, District Udaipur.

¶5

Naarin Lal S/o Shri Roshan Lal, Aged About 24 Years, B/c Garasiya, R/o Newaz, Panarva Police Station, District Udaipur.

¶6

(Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)

¶7

----Appellants Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Appellants : Mr. J.V.S. Deora For Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, Public Prosecutor

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

03/10/2018

¶14

This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the SC/ST Act’) has been filed on behalf of the appellants being aggrieved with the order dated 05.09.2018 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Udaipur (hereinafter to be referred as ‘trial court’) in Criminal Misc. Case No.279/2018, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellants.

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLAS-1073/2018]

¶17

The appellants have been arrested in FIR No.71/2018 of Police Station Ogana, District Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 498, 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants have not been named in the FIR, lodged by the prosecutrix. It is also submitted that the prosecutrix has also not named the appellants in her statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that as a matter of fact the allegation of selling the prosecutrix is against her husband Prabhulal and Vijay Singh and the allegation of purchasing the prosecutrix is against Ramesh Singh and from the material collected by the police, during the course of investigation, there is no direct involvement of the appellants in commission of any crime.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the appellants in this criminal appeal.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow the appeal filed by the accused appellants under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act.

¶22

Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act is allowed and the order dated 05.09.2018 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Udaipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.279/2018 is set aside. It is directed that appellants – (1) Nathu Singh S/o Khuman Singh, (2) Lalit Singh S/o Kan Singh Solanki

¶23

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-1073/2018]

¶24

and (3) Naarin Lal S/o Shri Roshan Lal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.71/2018 of Police Station Ogana, District Udaipur provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever

¶25

called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶26

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶27

Abhishek Kumar S.No.81

Nathu Singh v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nathu Singh v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Vs State of Rajasthan

Municipal Board Deedwana Vs the Addl. Divisional Commissioner

Imran Vs State of Rajasthan

Revanti Vs State and Ors.

Ummed Singh Vs State

Abbas Vs State of Rajasthan