Rahul Singh Son of Ramchandra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:5410]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 188/2025

Rahul Singh Son Of Ramchandra Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ward No. 37, Mewadi Gate, Outside Beawar Police Station Saket Nagar, District Beawar (At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer)

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The PP

¶8

Ashok Son Of Gulab Ram, R/o Balada Anantpur Kalu Beawar (Raj)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jiya Ur Rahman For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Tiwari, PP Ms. Bismaad Kaur Saluja

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶12

Order

¶13

06/02/2025

¶14

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order dated 06.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Ajmer (Raj.) in Criminal Case No. 12/2025 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.415/2024 registered at Police Station Saket Nagar, District Beawar for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1) of BNS, Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter.

[2025:RJ-JP:5410]

[CRLAS-188/2025]

(2 of 3)

It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged incident took place at the spur of moment. He submits that both the injuries sustained to injured person have been opined as simple in nature. Appellant is in custody since 19.11.2024. Charge-sheet has been filed & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of bail made in this appeal. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that opinion with regard to the injuries on the neck is still kept awaiting & intention of the appellant is explicit from the fact that he caused sharp injury on the neck of the victim which is a vital part of the body. They further submit that one other case is also pending against the appellant.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the appellant & learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, as also considering the opinion given by the medical expert with regard to the injuries sustained to injured person; trial will take time in its conclusion; looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail.

[2025:RJ-JP:5410]

[CRLAS-188/2025]

(3 of 3)

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 06.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Cases, Ajmer (Raj.) is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant- Rahul Singh Son Of Ramchandra Singh, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No. 415/2024 registered at Police Station Saket Nagar, District Beawar, 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.

¶25

It is made clear that the accused-appellant shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station.

¶26

Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the appellant, as directed above. In case the appellant fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶27

If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.

¶28

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶29

GAUTAM JAIN /333

Rahul Singh Son of Ramchandra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Singh Son of Ramchandra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kartar S/O Ramanlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Prabhulal S/O Dhulilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Abhimanyu Ydadav S/O Raj Singh Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Saroj W/O Naresh Vs State of Rajasthan

Golu @ Naresh S/O Gajanand Vs State of Rajasthan

Radhacharan S/O Sundar Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan