HAPPY DAHIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been filed under Sec. 14A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.556/2023, registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh, for the offences under Ss. 452, 307, 323, 147, 148 and 149 IPC and Ss. 3(2)(v), 3(2)(Va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dtd. 19/9/2023 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Hanumangarh, whereby, the bail application preferred under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

(2.) Drawing attention of the Court towards the F.I.R. and challan papers, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that specific allegation of using firearm has been levelled against co-accused Saksham Leela and Raj Choudhary. It was urged that omnibus allegation has been levelled against the appellant. Learned counsel submitted that co-accused persons namely Ramesh, Sudhir and Dinesh have already been enlarged on bail by the competent criminal court. Learned counsel further submitted that another co-accused namely Rahul Punia has also been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dtd. 20/10/2023 in S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No.2129/2023. Learned counsel submitted that the case of present appellant is not worse than that of the above named co-accused persons. It was submitted that the learned court below has grossly erred in law and facts as well in declining to release the appellant on bail. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in custody and trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to be concluded, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that specific allegation of using firearm has been levelled against co-accused Saksham Leela and Raj Choudhary and above named co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by the competent criminal court as well as by a coordinate Bench of this Court.

(3.) Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at bar, so also the fact that specific allegation of using firearm has been levelled against the present appellant and other co-accused persons against whom similar accusation has been levelled have already been enlarged on bail, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.