Allowed

Ratan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Jul 2024CRLAS/674/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal regarding offences under IPC and SC/ST Act, the High Court allowed the bail application, observing that prosecution witness statements were not fully reliable, other accused were exonerated, and the principal accused had died in custody, finding no compelling reason to keep the appellant detained pending trial.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; Accellant released on bail with personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Ratan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:29792]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 674/2024

¶4

Ratan Singh S/o Kamal Singh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Dungarpura, Sanau, P.s. Chohtan, Dist. Barmer. (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail Barmer)

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

Balvanta Ram S/o Suja Ram, R/o Dungarpura Sanau, P.s. Chohtan, Dist. Barmer.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s)	:	Mr. Deepak Menaria Ms. Geeta Panpaliya
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA Mr. Siddharth Kadwasara
		Mr. Devi Sahay Meena, Addl. DCP
		(Protocol) Commissionerate, Jaipur Mr. Jaikishan Soni, CI, SHO,
		Ramgarh,Jaisalmer

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶12

Order

¶13

22/07/2024

¶14

Additional SP – Shri Devi Sahay Meena who conducted investigation in the matter and Shri Jaikishan who was the Station House Officer when the charge-sheet was chalked out, are present-in-person before this Court along with learned Additional Government Advocate Shri Abhishek Purohit. It is apprised to this Court that after conducting an incisive probe in the matter, to a large extent, the statements of some prosecution witnesses were not found fully reliable, however, he concedes that neither the witnesses were fully reliable nor fully unreliable. From the investigation conducted so far in the matter, it was found that only

[2024:RJ-JD:29792]

[CRLAS-674/2024]

(2 of 4)

two accused persons, the present petitioner Ratan Singh and the other Jai Singh were involved in commission of the crime. Rest of the accused persons were not present at the crime scene for which relevant material was collected during investigation, however, the fact could not be mentioned in detail in the report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. though a brief note is mentioned there.

¶19

The submission and the explanation made with regard to exoneration of left out accused seems to be convincing, thus, further proceeding against these two Officers are dropped.

¶20

Heard on bail application. 4. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.132/2023, Police Station Chohtan, District Barmer for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 307 and 149 of the IPC & 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2) (va) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After rejection of the first appeal preferred for bail, now the statements of the first informant has been recorded and the appellant approached this Court directly by filing this appeal.

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Expeditious culmination of trial is not a seeming fate and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the appellant behind the bars. He, therefore, prays that benefit of bail may be granted to the appellant.

[2024:RJ-JD:29792]

[CRLAS-674/2024]

(3 of 4)

Per contra, learned learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor as well as perused the material available on record. 8. It is the case of the prosecution that five accused persons made an assault over the deceased, however, three were exonerated from the charges and the charge-sheet came to be submitted only against two persons. It is further reflecting that it was accused Jai Singh who inflicted injuries to the deceased as a consequence of which he succumbed to death, however, the presence of the petitioner was shown accompanying the principal accused. The recovery of the murder weapon was made from the accused Jai Singh. The said Jai Singh has passed away now in judicial custody.

¶27

The submission made by Shri Siddharth Kadwasara, learned counsel appearing for the complainant is subject matter of the trial and can only be adjudicated finely after making a thread bare discussion of the evidence brought on record by the trial Court but at this stage when the principal accused has passed away and the petitioner is behind the bars, I do not see any compelling circumstances to keep the petitioner behind the bars for a further indefinite period looking to the fact that early culmination of the trial is not a seeming fate. In this background and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶28

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant, named in the cause title, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR, shall

[2024:RJ-JD:29792]

[CRLAS-674/2024]

(4 of 4)

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.

¶33

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶34

302-divya/-

Ratan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratan Singh 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

Karni Dan Vs Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Nepal Singh Vs Union of India

Harvinder Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohan Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Bhajan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Kumar Vs Food Corporation of India, Jaipur