Allowed

Prem Kumar Parihar @ Pk v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Jul 2024CRLAS/550/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the criminal appeal and granted bail to the appellants, setting aside the lower court's rejection. The court observed the incident was a spur-of-the-moment occurrence arising from a dispute, with no premeditation, and that the appellants had been in custody for a considerable time.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 50,000/- each, subject to furnishing bank account details and Aadhar cards.

Prem Kumar Parihar @ Pk Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:26589]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 550/2024

¶4

Prem Kumar Parihar @ PK S/o Jawrilal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Maliyo Ki Dhaani, Surpura Khurd, P.S. Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Jodhpur).

¶5

Dinesh Parihar S/o Jawrilal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Maliyo Ki Dhaani, Surpura Khurd, P.S. Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Jodhpur).

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan through PP

¶9

Arjun S/o Rajuram Bawri, R/o Bhopalgarh, P.S. Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s)	: Mr.	Vineet Jain, Sr. Adv. assisted by
	Mr.	Jaikishan Haniya
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Laxman Solanki, PP
	Mr.	DilipChoudhary

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

¶13

Order

¶14

02/07/2024

¶15

Instant Criminal appeal has been preferred to enlarge the appellants on bail under Section 14A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment act 2015 and being aggrieved of the order dated 03.04.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jodhpur Metro in Criminal Bail Case No.91/2024 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellants who are in custody in connection with FIR No.59/2024, Police Station Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur Rural, for offences under Sections 341, 323, 307/34 of IPC and Sections 3

[CRLAS-550/2024]

[2024:RJ-JD:26589]

(2 of 4)

(1) (r) (s), 3 (2) (va) of of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶20

Learned counsel representing the appellants vehemently urged that appellants are innocent person and a false case has been foisted against them; that entire allegations so leveled by the police against the appellants is totally false and baseless; that there is no concrete evidence to show direct nexus between the appellants and alleged crime, rather case of the prosecution is based on surmises and conjectures instead of sound legal evidence. With the aforesaid submissions, it was prayed that the present appeal be allowed and appellants may be enlarged on bail. 3. From the other side, learned Public Prosecutor for the State has strongly objected the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and submitted that there is overwhelming evidence adduced on record which would prima-facie point towards the guilt of the appellants; that keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by them, they do not deserve any leniency, rather they need to be dealt with severely. He thus, prayed that in the facts of the present case, it is expedient that accused be kept in the custody.

¶21

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully. 5. Having regard to the facts of the case and taking into account totality of circumstances, in my considered opinion, the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants cannot be completely overlooked. In the present case, charge-sheet has already been filed before the trial Court. Prima-facie this Court is

[2024:RJ-JD:26589]

[CRLAS-550/2024]

(3 of 4)

of the view that incident has been occurred at spur of the moment and it was a result of heated argument between the parties. The hospitalized period of the injured was one day. Prima-facie no intention or premeditation to cause the injury is found. The cause of the incident was dispute of parking of the vehicle as well as selling of vegetables at the same locality by both the parties. The appellants are in custody since 31.03.2024; that the bail rejection order goes to show that appellants are not involved in any other case; that the trial is likely to take its own considerable time and no useful purpose would be served by keeping them in detention for an indefinite period. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the appellants deserve indulgence of bail and thus, the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellants cannot be sustained.

¶26

Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 03.04.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jodhpur Metro in Criminal Bail Case No.91/2024 is set aside and it is ordered that the accusedappellants 1. Prem Kumar Parihar @ PK S/o Jawrilal and 2. Dinesh Parihar S/o Jawrilal arrested in connection with FIR No.59/2024 Police Station Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur Rural shall be released on bail during pendency of the trial; provided each of them furnish 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 and if not required by Jail Authorities in any other case. This order is subject to the condition that accused, within 7 days of their release and sureties, on the

(4 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:26589]

[CRLAS-550/2024]

day of furnishing bail, will also furnish details of their all bank accounts, with bank and branch name, in shape of an affidavit, and submit legible copy of their Aadhar cards as well as front page of Bank pass book, for smooth recovery of penalty amount, if there arise a need for recovery of penalty under Section 446 Cr.P.C in future.

¶31

With the abovesaid directions, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of.

¶32

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶33

99-suraj/-

Prem Kumar Parihar @ Pk v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar Parihar @ Pk 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

Gauri Shankar @ Gauri Vs State of Rajasthan

Hari Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan

Durgalal Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Pal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kheta Ram Vs State of Rajasthan