This bail appeal by Aslam challenged his continued remand after an order by the Special Judge. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and granted bail with bond and sureties.
Appellant released on bail; personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each required.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 84/2023
Aslam Son Of Mauja, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Dharmshala, Police Station Kaithwada, District Bharatpur (Raj) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail Deeg)
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ankit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Saini, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Order
24/01/2023
The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No. 172/2022 Police Station Kaithwada, District Bharatpur for the offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 325, 307, 354, 427, 452 & 504 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) (s)(w) & 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the accused-appellant has falsely been implicated in the case. He has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that the injuries caused to the injured- Amar Singh, are attributed to the main accused- Hakku and the case of the present appellant is on better footing that the main accused. The co-
(2 of 2)
[CRLAS-84/2023]
accused persons have already been granted bail by the coordinate bench of this Court. Trial is likely to take long time to conclude and keeping the accused-appellant behind the bars till disposal of the appeal, would serve no fruitful purpose. Therefore, benefit of bail may be granted to the appellant.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the appeal.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Bharatpur in Criminal Application No. 375/2022 (CIS No.595/2022), is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant- Aslam Son Of Mauja, 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. 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.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J
SAHIL SONI /142
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant deserves bail on the ground of false implication and prolonged trial.
Whether the impugned order denying bail should be set aside.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Aslam
State Of Rajasthan
Vinod Kumar Bharwani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
