Dismissed

Anna Ram v. State

Rajasthan HC9 Apr 2018CRLAS/333/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special criminal appeal against the rejection of a bail application in a case involving a fire leading to death of an elder and SC/ST Act offences, this Court held the appellant was a main accused. The bail appeal was dismissed, but the trial court was directed to expedite proceedings given the appellant's detention since 2015.

What did the court decide?

Bail denied; trial court directed to expedite trial.

Anna Ram Vs State — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 333 / 2018

¶3

Anna Ram Son of Late Shri Shakta Ram, By Caste Raika (Devasi), Resident of Basvani, Police Station Nagaur, District Nagaur. (At Present Lodged in District Jail, Nagaur)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Rajasthan

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Awasthi,P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶10

Order

¶11

09/04/2018

¶12

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

¶13

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A (2) of SC/ST (PA) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No. 38/2015, Police Station Sadar, Distt. Nagaur for the offences under Sections 147, 302/149, 307/149, 326/149, 324/149, 451, 436 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act against the order dated 03.01.2018 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Merta whereby the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

¶14

Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that similarly situated co-accused Meh Ram has already been granted bail by

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLAS-333/2018]

¶17

this Court and eye-witness Harendra clearly stated in his crossexamination that he has not seen as to who lit the fire to hut which resulted in death of his grand-mother. He further argued that so far 22 witnesses have been examined and appellant is behind the bars since 2015 and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. The learned court below has grossly erred in law and facts as well in declining to release the appellant on bail.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail but he submitted that according to statement of PW/20 Harendra who is also injured witness clearly stated that Chela Ram and Ana Ram both lit the fire due to which his grand-mother expired. In cross-examination at one time, he mentioned that he does not know as to who lit the fire but later on in cross-examination, he mentioned that he could identify only Chela Ram and Anna Ram and could not identify three other persons. Thus, the present appellant’s case is altogether different from the co-accused meh Ram who has been granted benefit of bail.

¶19

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 PW/20 Harendra who is also injured eye-witness clearly named appellant and Chela Ram for litting the fire due to which his grand-mother expired, therefore, the present appellant is one of the main accused in this case. Therefore, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. Accordingly, the present appeal is hereby rejected. However, looking to the fact that appellant is behind the

¶20

(3 of 3)

¶21

[CRLAS-333/2018]

¶22

bars since 2015, therefore, trial court is directed to expedite the

¶23

trial.

¶24

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG) J.

¶25

bjsh

Anna Ram v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anna Ram 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

Laxman Singh Vs State

Suresh Kumar Vs State

Smt Mangla Devi and Ors. Vs State

Jethnath Vs State

Sampat and Anr. Vs State

Bhanu @ Sunny Sain Vs State