Allowed

Gopal @ Vickey S/O Ramesh Chand v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Jan 2023CRLAS/2399/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This special criminal appeal seeks bail for the appellant in custody for offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and IPC. The High Court set aside the impugned order rejecting bail and directed the release of the appellant on a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Gopal @ Vickey S/O Ramesh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2399/2022

¶3

Gopal @ Vickey S/o Ramesh Chand, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Dhani Talvraksh Jetpur Police Station Sadar Gangapur City District Sawai Madhopur (Raj) (At Present In Central Jail Sawai Madhopur)

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶7

Ramjilal S/o Kanhiyalal, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Talvarksh Jetpur, Police Station Sadar Gangapur District Sawai Madhopur (Raj)

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Laxmi Narayan Saini
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Yashwant Kankhadia, Public
	Prosecutor
	Mr. Sudhir Yadav for complainant

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶11

Order

¶12

19/01/2023

¶13

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14(A) (2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.148/2022 registered at Police Station Sadar Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 143, 326, 302 & 120-B of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 21.11.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Sawai Madhopur, whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

¶14

(2 of 3) [CRLAS-2399/2022]

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that first appeal of the appellant was dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court as not pressed vide order dated 07.07.2022 and the second appeal of the appellant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2022 as withdrawn. The appellant is behind the bars since 25.05.2022 and charge-sheet has been filed. As per rejection bail order, the appellant has no criminal antecedents. Counsel further submits that the appellant is not named in the FIR and as per Parcha Bayan of Ramjilal/FIR, Ramkesh hit on the head of the deceased- Chetram Meena and as per Post Mortem Report of Chetram, cause of death is ante-mortem head injury. Counsel also submits that the bail application of co-accused Teekaram has already been granted by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.12.2022 and the appeal of co-accused Vickey @ Mankesh has been granted by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.07.2022. Therefore, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant may kindly be released on bail.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have strongly opposed the appeal. Counsel for the complainant has further submitted that looking to the Police statements of Fara, wife of complainant and mother of the deceased, Vaijanti, wife of the deceased and Kumari Komal, daughter of the deceased, appeal of the appellant may be rejected.

¶17

Heard. Perused the material available on record.

¶18

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-2399/2022]

¶19

As per the Police statements of Fara, Vaijanti and Kumari Komal, no specific allegation has been levelled against the appellant with regard to the head injury of the deceasedChetram. Therefore, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed . The impugned order dated 21.11.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sawai Madhopur is set aside and it is ordered that the accused-appellant Gopal @ Vickey S/o Ramesh Chand arrested in connection with aforesaid F.I.R. shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 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

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶22

Satyendra/113

Gopal @ Vickey S/O Ramesh Chand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal @ Vickey S/O Ramesh Chand 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

Shabbir Husain S/O Mahmood Husain Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash S/O Late Shri Harji, Vs Hanuman Singh S/O Shri Shrawan Singh

Shankar Meena Son of Shri Chanda Lal Meena Vs Shanti Devi Wife of Late Shri Ramu

Smt Ganeshpuri Thr Lrs Vs Prakash Chand and Anr.

Urban Improvement Trust Vs G L Verma and Ors.

Murlidhar Sharma Vs Shri Purushottam Sharma and Anr.