Allowed

Gulshan Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Apr 2023CRLAS/315/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan allowed appeals challenging the rejection of bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The court set aside impugned orders and granted bail, citing the factual dispute, settlement between parties, and a co-accused already released.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders setting aside bail applications are quashed along with this Court allowing bail to accused-appellants.

Gulshan Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/010067]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 369/2023

¶4

Mohammed Irfan Makrani S/o Abdul Hakim, Aged About 30 Years, Vill. Samited, Teh. Kherwara, Dist. Udaipur. (Confined In Central Jail, Udaipur).

¶5

Immamul Haq S/o Inayat Mohammed, Aged About 27 Years, Surada, Teh. Sarada, Dist. Udaipur. (Confined In Central Jail, Udaipur).

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

Mukesh Kumar Meena S/o Nanga Ji Meena, Bhyampura, Padarda Post, Jhadol, Teh. Sarada, Dist. Udaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

Connected With

¶12

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 315/2023

¶13

Gulshan Kumar S/o Kantilal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Rabiya Ps Kherwada Dist. Udaipur Raj. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)

¶14

----Appellant

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Mukesh Kumar S/o Nanga, R/o Padarda Post Shyampura Jhadol Tehsil Sarada Dist. Udaipur Raj.

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. JS Deora (Criminal Appeal No. 369/2023)
	Mr. Anuj Sahlot (Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 315/2023)
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP Mr. Dinesh Bishnoi,for Complainant

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶20

Order

¶21

13/04/2023

¶22

The instant appeals have 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.136/2023, Police Station Savina, District – Udaipur, for the offences under Sections 323, 365,

[2023/RJJD/010067]

[CRLAS-369/2023]

(2 of 3)

394, 395 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act against the order dated 18.03.2023 and 15.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Udaipur whereby, the bail applications preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellants was rejected.

¶27

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the parties have mutually settled the dispute. It is further submitted that the co-accused Bhagwati Lal has already been granted bail by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Udaipur vide order dated 31.03.2023. The accused-appellants are in custody since long and the trial of the case will take long time. Therefore, it is prayed that the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellants.

¶28

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail applications. However, learned Public Prosecutor did not dispute the fact of settlement between the parties.

¶29

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 the orders rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellants, cannot be sustained and deserve to be set aside.

¶30

Consequently, the instant appeals are allowed. The impugned orders dated 18.03.2023 and 15.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Udaipur is set aside. It is ordered that the accusedappellants – (1) Mohammed Irfan Makrani S/o Abdul Hakim

[2023/RJJD/010067]

[CRLAS-369/2023]

(3 of 3)

(2) Immamul Haq S/o Inayat Mohammed (3) Gulshan Kumar S/o Kantilal arrested in connection with FIR No.136/2023, Police Station Savina, District Udaipur, shall be released on bail; provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- each and two surety bonds of Rs.50,000/- 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.

¶35

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶36

217-218 neha/-

Gulshan Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulshan Kumar 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

Mujjaffer @ Goga Vs State of Rajasthan

Rupa @ Roop Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pankaj Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Moti Khan Vs State of Rajasthan