Kuldeep Mathur, J
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 F.I.R. No.03/2024, registered at Police Station Suratgarh City, District Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 295-A and 120-B of IPC and Section 3(2) (va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 11.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Sri Ganganagar whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the material available on record.
Leaned counsel for the appellant submitted that the co-accused- Mohmmad Mojram @ Samir has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.04.2024 passed in S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 226/2024. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present appellant is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused- Mohmmad Mojram @ Samir who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. The order dated 08.04.2024 passed by this Court in the case of Mohmmad Mojram @ Samir Vs. State of Rajasthan is reproduced below for ready reference:-
“The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.03/2024, registered at Police Station Suratgarh City, District Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 295-A and 120-B IPC and Sections 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 31.1.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
Leaned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards the charge-sheet submitted by the investigating agency before the competent criminal court, learned counsel submitted that as per the investigating agency, the prosecutrix freely who is aged about 35 years and is a mature woman, has freely exercised her choice of consciously developing a consensual sexual relationship with the main accused and brother of the petitioner namely Mohd.Aslam @ Salman. Learned counsel submitted that no offence under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act have been found to be made out against the present petitioner as well as co-accused by the investigating agency. Learned counsel submitted that the offence under Section 295-A IPC has been found to be proved against the petitioner, however prosecution sanction from State Government is still awaited for filing challan against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences.
Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in judicial custody, challan has been filed 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.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at Bar, this Court prima facie finds that the offences under Sections 376(2)(n) IPC and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act have not been found to be proved against the present petitioner. This Court also prima facie finds that though the offences under Sections 323, 324 and 295-A IPC have been found to be proved against the present petitioner, but the prosecution sanction for filing challan against the petitioner for the offences under Section 295-A IPC has yet not been received. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of petitioner influencing the prosecutrix or tampering with the evidence in case he is enlarged on bail. Further, the prosecution has also not shown any apprehension of petitioner fleeing away from justice in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, in the opinion of this Court the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.
Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 31.1.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Mohmmad Mojram @ Samir S/o Mohammad Kafil, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.03/2024, registered at Police Station Suratgarh City, District Sri Ganganagar shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds 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.”
Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in custody since 25.01.2024 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.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the co-accused- Mohmmad Mojram @ Samir has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances as available on record in entirety and upon a careful consideration of the arguments advanced at Bar, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the case of the present appellant is not distinguishable from the of the co-accused- Mohmmad Mojram @ Samir who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.04.2024 passed in S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 226/2024. Thus, the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.
Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Sri Ganganagar is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Mohammad Aslam @ Salman S/o Mohammad Kafil arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.03/2024, registered at Police Station Suratgarh City, District Sri Ganganagar shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds 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.
