Allowed

Vimlesh @ Mota S/O Sushil Sharma, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Jul 2022CRLAS/1277/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed against the bail rejection order. It held that the appellant deserves bail given the alleged falsity of accusations, long delay in FIR, and discrepancies in statements, directing his release on bail.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; accused released on bail on furnishing Rs. 50,000/- personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Vimlesh @ Mota S/O Sushil Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1277/2022

¶3

Vimlesh @ Mota S/o Sushil Sharma, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Purohiton Ki Dhani, Police Station Sadar Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu. (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu).

¶4

----Accused-Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶7

Victim, R/o Purohiton Ki Dhani, Police Station Sadar Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Intjar Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, PP Mr. Rahul Agarwal

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

20/07/2022

¶13

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No. 137/2022, Police Station Sadar Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu, for the offences under Sections 323, 384, 506, 376(2)(n) of IPC, Sections 3(1)(w) (i), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 67 of the IT Act.

¶14

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that false allegations have been levelled against the appellant and he did not commit any of the alleged offence(s). As narrated in the FIR by prosecutrix, the appellant was blackmailing her since two and a half years. It is highly improbable that she was being blackmailed

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLAS-1277/2022]

¶17

for such a long period of time but she kept mum and did not raise any complaints against the appellant. The FIR has been lodged after an inordinate delay and no reasonable explanation has been furnished for the same. There are serious discrepancies between her statements recorded under Section 161 and Section 164 of Cr.P.C. He further submits that the FIR has been lodged under pressure of family members. Therefore, the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present matter on the basis of fabrications and benefit of bail may be granted to the appellant.

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application and stated that the matter involves commission of grave offence(s) and the appellant should not be enlarged on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary. The submission of the counsel that the dispute between the parties is something different than what has been alleged seems to be worth considering. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced, I am of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.07.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jhunjhunu in Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 245/2022 is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant-Vimlesh @ Mota S/o Sushil Sharma 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.

¶19

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-1277/2022]

¶20

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.

¶21

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶22

Anu /156

Vimlesh @ Mota S/O Sushil Sharma, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimlesh @ Mota S/O Sushil Sharma, v. State of Rajasthan

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

Ramsingh Son of Shri Ramcharan Kherwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Pardeep @ Chichu S/O Jaswant Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashok Kumar S/O Prabhudayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Son of Shri Kaptan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Chand Vs Sitaram and Others

Bharat S/O Shri Soneram Vs the State of Rajasthan