[ad_1]
Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Ram Chopara @ Baccha S/O Lt Dili Chopara vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jp:25078) on 8 July, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2025:RJ-JP:25078]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1726/2025
Ram Chopara @ Baccha S/o Lt Dili Chopara, Aged About 19 Years, R/o
House No. 5, F8, Bombay Yogana Near Chawala Circle, P.S. R.K.
Puram Kota (Raj) (At Present Confined In District Jail Kota)
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Dharamchand Bairwa S/o Ramswaroop Bairwa, R/o Tenant At
House Of Banwar, Bombay Yogana R.K. Puram Kota Permanent
Address Dadiya Baroni Tonk (Raj)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amit Dadhich
Mr. Vishal Kumar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP
For Complainant(s) : Mr. Devanshu Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
08/07/2025
1. This instant appeal has been filed under Section 14(2)(A)
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved of the order
dated 02.06.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota in Bail Application (CIS)
No.93/2025 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of
the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR
No.328/2024 registered at Police Station R.K. Puram, District Kota
City for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
109(1) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’)
2023 and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
1989 (Amendment 2015). After completion of investigation, police
filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under
(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:50:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:25078] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-1726/2025]
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 118(1), 118(2) & 3(5) of BNS,
2023, Sections 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) & 3(1)(r) of SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act 1989 (Amendment 2015) and Section 4/25 of Arms
Act, 1959 (Amendment 2019).
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that
appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended
that on an earlier occasion, prayer for bail was made on behalf of
the appellant however, same was rejected by this court vide order
dated 15.01.2025 thereafter, parties have entered into
compromise as complainant of this case does not want to pursue
the prosecution against the appellant. It is submitted that trial will
take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that
appellant is in custody since 01.10.2024 and further custody of
the appellant would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer of
bail made in this appeal. He submits that there is allegation
against the appellant of causing life threatening injury and offence
under Section 109(1) (Corresponding to section 307 of IPC) has
been found proved against the appellant.
4. Learned counsel appearing for complainant submits that
under the intervention of respected persons of society, appellant
and complainant have entered into compromise. He further
submits that he has no objection if facility of bail is granted to the
appellant.
5. Heard. Perused the material available on record.
6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances;
considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both
(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:50:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:25078] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-1726/2025]
the parties and the fact that parties have entered into compromise
as well as 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.
7. Consequently, this instant appeal is allowed. The impugned
order dated 02.06.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota is set aside. It is ordered
that the accused-appellant Ram Chopara @ Baccha S/o Lt Dili
Chopara, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR No.328/2024
registered at Police Station R.K. Puram, District Kota City, shall be
released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he shall
furnish 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.
8. 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, till trial is concluded.
9. 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.
10. 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
(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:50:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:25078] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-1726/2025]
Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.
11. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the
instant appeal and would not have any impact on the trial of the
case in any manner.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
CHARU SONI /41
(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:50:36 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_2]
Source link