Allowed

Intjar @ Intu Son of Lukman Ahmad v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC14 Mar 2024CRLAS/331/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act against rejection of bail in a case involving Sections 306 IPC and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act. Cognizance had been taken on a protest petition after an initial FR. Considering custody duration and trial delay, the High Court set aside the rejection and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted; order dated 01.02.2024 rejecting bail set aside; release on personal bond Rs.50,000 with two sureties Rs.25,000 each.

Intjar @ Intu Son of Lukman Ahmad Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[CRLAS-331/2024]

¶2

(1 of 3)

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 331/2024

¶5

Intjar @ Intu Son Of Lukman Ahmad, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Wazirpur Police Station Wazirpur, District Gangapur City (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail Gangapur City)

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

Virendr Singh Gunawat Son Of Dhan Singh, Resident Of Kishorpur, Police Station Wazirpur, District Sawai Madhopur Presently District Gangapur City

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP Mr. Tarun Jain

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶13

Order

¶14

14/03/2024

¶15

This criminal appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the SC/ST Act’) has been filed on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 01.02.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Sawaimadhopur (hereinafter to be referred as ‘trial court’) in Bail Application No.28/2024, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant.

¶16

[CRLAS-331/2024]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

The appellant has been arrested in FIR No. 357/2019 registered at Police Station Wazirpur, District Sawaimadhopur for the offences punishable under Sections 306 of IPC and Sections 3(2) (v) of SC/ST Act.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that police, after registration of the FIR, has initiated the investigation and arrived at a conclusion that prima facie no offence is made out against the present petitioner. Learned trial court on the protest petition, has taken cognizance against the petitioner under Section 306 of the IPC and Section 3 (2) (V) of the SC/ST Act and sent into custody rejecting the application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no substantive evidence against the petitioner that he instigated the deceased resulting into his suicide. Petitioner is in custody from last one and a half month and investigation/trial of the case will take considerable time. Therefore, the benefit of grant of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application and submit that learned trial court, after considering the entire evidence available on record, took the cognizance against the present petitioner under section 306 IPC and there is ample evidence against the petitioner that he instigated the deceased which resulted into suicide therefore, bail application of petitioner may be dismissed.

¶21

[CRLAS-331/2024]

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

Heard and perused the impugned order as well as the entire record. Without commenting anything on the merit of the case and considering the fact that initially FR was submitted before the concerned trial court and cognizance against the accused petitioner was taken later on by the trial court on the protest petition and so also the fact that petitioner is in custody since long and trial of the case will take time, therefore, I deem it just and proper to allow the appeal filed by the accused-appellant under Section 14-A of SC/ST Act.

¶24

Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A of SC/ST Act is allowed and order dated 01.02.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Sawaimadhopur is set aside. It is directed that appellant- Intjar @ Intu Son Of Lukman Ahmad, shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.357/2019 registered at Police Station Wazirpur, District Sawaimadhopur, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶25

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶26

ashu /156

Intjar @ Intu Son of Lukman Ahmad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Intjar @ Intu Son of Lukman Ahmad 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

Sardar S/O Omkar Vs State of Rajasthan

Durga and Ors. Vs State

Kamal Chavlani @ Kamal Sindhi S/O Sh. Jawahar Lal Chavlani Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shayam Singh S/O Nainsingh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Firm M/S Shri Gurukripa Khad Beej Bhandar Vs State of Rajasthan

Pravesh Kumar S/O Jorawar Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan