Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Dariya Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:19053) on 21 April, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:19053]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 644/2025
1. Dariya Singh S/o Ram Sukh, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
Chak No. 27 Bd P.s. Khajuwala, Dist. Bikaner,raj.
2. Kanhiya Lal @ Kanhi Ram S/o Ram Sukh, Aged About 56
Years, R/o Chak No. 27 Bd P.S. Khajuwala, Dist.
Bikaner,raj.
----Appellants
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Rajendra S/o Sri Lalchand, R/o Mastiwali Head, Tehsil
Tibbi, P.s. Talwada, Dist. Hanumangarh
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. H.S.S.S. Kharlia, Sr. Advocate
assisted by Ms. Kinjal Purohit
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sonu Manawat, PP
Mr. Kaushal Gautam
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
21/04/2025
The present criminal appeal has been filed under 14A (2) of
the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellants have been
arrested in connection with FIR No.304/2019, Police Station,
Khajuwala, District Bikaner for the offence under Sections 302,
307, 325, 323, 341 and 34 of IPC and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
The present appeal is against the order dated 19.03.2025 passed
by the learned Special Judge (Additional District & Session Judge),
Bikaner, whereby the bail application preferred under Section 439
Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) on behalf of the appellants was rejected.
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:47:32 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:19053] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-644/2025]
Earlier, the criminal appeal was dismissed as withdrawn qua
the appellant No.2 – Kanhiya Lal @ Kanhi Ram vide order dated
04.04.2025 passed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant
No.1 – Dariya Singh has been in custody since 09.11.2019 and the
trial of the case is yet pending. Counsel further submits that the
appeal filed by similar situated co-accused persons namely,
Dharmendra Kumar and Roshan Lal has been allowed and they
have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated
11.03.2025.
In support of his contentions, learned counsel placed reliance
on the judgment of Honb’le Supreme Court in the case of
Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (Special Leave to
Appeal (Crl.) No.8523/2024) in which while granting bail it has
been observed as under:
” 9. The incident in the present case occurred on
25.06.2020 and the petitioner was arrested
soon thereafter on 26.06.2020. By now, 6 co-
accused have been granted bail. As the
prosecution wishes to examine 17 more
witnesses, the trial is unlikely to conclude on a
near date.
10. Considering the above and to avoid the
situation of the trial process itself being the
punishment particularly when there is
presumption of innocence under the Indian
jurisprudence, we deem it appropriate to grant
bail to the petitioner – Balwinder Singh. It is
ordered accordingly. Appropriate bail conditions
be imposed by the learned trial court.”
A coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Umesh Vyas
vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. II Bail Application
No.14958/2022), vide order dated 17.03.2023, also observed as
follows:
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:47:32 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:19053] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-644/2025]
“The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Abdul
Majeed Lone Vs. Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.3961/2022], Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of
Himachal Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.668/2020),
Tapan Das Vs. Union of India [Special Leave to
Appeal (Criminal) No.5617/2021], Kulwant Singh
Vs. State of Punjab [Special Leave to Appeal
(Criminal) No.5187/2019], Ghanshyam Sharma
Vs. State of Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal
(Criminal) No.5397/2019], Nadeem Vs. State of
UP [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.1524/2022] and Mukesh Vs. The State of
Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.4089/2021] has granted bail to the accused
persons, against whom the allegations are of
transporting or possessing narcotic contraband
above commercial quantity, on the ground of
custody period and taking into consideration the
fact that the trial against the said accused persons
will take time in completion. The Hon’ble Supreme
Court has ordered for release of the accused
persons who were in custody from two years to
four years. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed
the bail application.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to
allow this fifth bail application solely on the ground
of custody period of the accused petitioner and
keeping in view the fact that the trial against him
has not been completed till date.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, this third bail application
filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
directed that petitioner Umesh Vyas S/o Shri
Ganeshlal Ji shall be released on bail in
connection with FIR No.15/2019 of Police Station
Charbhuja, District Rajsamand provided he
executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-
with two sound and solvent sureties of
Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned
trial court for his appearance before that court on
each and every date of hearing and whenever
called upon to do so till the completion of the
trial.”
The appellant No.1 – Dariya Singh has been in custody since
09.11.2019 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long
time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the appellant
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:47:32 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:19053] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-644/2025]prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-
appellant.
Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant
have vehemently opposed the prayer made by counsel for the
appellants and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
I have considered the arguments advanced before me and
gone through the material available on record.
Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as
available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments
advanced at the bar, since the appellant No.1 – Dariya Singh is
behind bars for some time and the trial is yet pending, this Court
is of the opinion that the order rejecting the application for bail
filed on behalf of the appellant No.1 – Dariya Singh, cannot be
sustained and deserves to be set aside.
Accordingly, the present criminal appeal is partly allowed.
The impugned order dated 19.03.2025 is set aside and it is
ordered that the accused-appellant No.1 – Dariya Singh S/o
Ram Sukh, shall be enlarged on bail in FIR No.304/2019, Police
Station, Khajuwala, District Bikaner provided he furnishes a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties of
Rs.1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge
for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of
hearing as and when called upon to do so.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
44-mSingh/-
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:47:32 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_1]
Source link