Allowed

Amarpreet @ Amarjeet @ Happy v. State of Rajathan

Rajasthan HC3 Nov 2023CRLAS/2192/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court in criminal appeal allowed the appeal against the Special Court's bail rejection order dated 18.09.2023. The bench held the rejection unsustainable in light of a similar co-accused having been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench and the nature of the injury. The appellant was directed to be released on bail.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned bail rejection order; ordered release of the appellant on bail upon furnishing personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Amarpreet @ Amarjeet @ Happy Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:37626]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2192/2023

¶4

Amarpreet @ Amarjeet @ Happy S/o Malkeet Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Santpura P.s. Sangariya, Dist. Hanumangarh (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Sriganganagar)

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajathan, Through Pp

¶8

Deep Singh S/o Darshan Singh, B/c Majbi Sikh, R/o 18 Sd P.s. Jaitsar, Anoopgarh

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

03/11/2023

¶14

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.82/2022 registered in Police Station Jawaharnagar, District Sriganganagar, for the offences under Sections 307, 458, 323 & 143 I.P.C. and 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(V), 3(2)(Va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 18.09.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar, whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

(2 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JD:37626]

[CRLAS-2192/2023]

Leaned counsel for the appellant submitted that the injuries allegedly inflicted by the present petitioner upon injured Gagandeep Singh are though grievous in nature but not dangerous to life.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that coaccused Smt. Poonam Kaur has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 29.09.2022. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of co-accused Smt. Poonam Kaur who has been enlarged on bail; no recovery is due to be made from the present petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is of causing injuries upon injured Gagandeep Singh by kicks and feets. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody and trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to be concluded, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that looking to the seriousness of accusations against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, learned Public Prosecutor was not in position to refute the fact that Smt. Poonam Kaur against whom similar allegations were leveled by the prosecution, has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.09.2022.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that service upon respondent No.2 has been effected through the S.H.O. concerned.

¶23

Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at bar, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the

[2023:RJ-JD:37626]

[CRLAS-2192/2023]

(3 of 3)

appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.

¶28

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.09.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar is set aside. It is ordered that the accusedappellant Amarpreet @ Amarjeet @ Happy S/o Malkeet Singh arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.82/2022 registered in Police Station Jawaharnagar, District Sriganganagar 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.

¶29

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶30

553-suraj/divya-

Amarpreet @ Amarjeet @ Happy v. State of Rajathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarpreet @ Amarjeet @ Happy v. State of Rajathan

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

Ganga Singh Vs State of Rajastan

Tola Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Udailal Vs State of Rajasthan

Heera Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan

Dhagal Singh @ Arjun Singh Vs State of Rajasthan