|
1. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the victim has been informed about filing of this appeal in compliance with mandate of Section 15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. The appellant has filed this second criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by order dated 24.01.2026 passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Vidisha, whereby bail application under Section 483 of BNSS of appellant has been dismissed. First criminal appeal for grant of bail was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.01.2026 passed in CRA No.12626/2025.
3. Appellant has been arrested on 09.12.2025 by the Police Station- Basoda, District Vidisha in connection with Crime No.730/2025, registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 296, 126(2), 118(1), 3(5), 118(2), 109(1) of BNS and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the present case charge sheet has been filed, hence this application may be considered on merit. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that FIR was lodged on 4.10.2025 at the instance of injured Tejas. In the said FIR, name of present appellant was not mentioned, however it was mentioned that some unknown person has caused injury to Abhishek by means of knife. Learned counsel submits that subsequently, statements of injured Tejas and Abhishek were recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. but in the said statements, no date was mentioned. In the said statement, first time name of appellant came in light. Subsequently, supplementary statements were recorded on 8.12.2025, in which also name of the appellant was mentioned and thereafter the appellant was arrested on 9.12.2025 mentioning therein that present appellant has caused injury to Abhishek. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the crime. The prosecution has developed the story by implicating the present appellant in the crime. Injuries sustained by Abhishek are simple in nature. Appellant is in custody since 9.12.2025. Trial is likely to take long time to conclude. The appellant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions which may be imposed by the Court. Thus, on these grounds, he prays that the impugned order may be set aside and appellant may be extended the benefit of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection.
6. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that trial will take some time, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
8. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant:-
1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2.The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3.The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4.The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5.The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6.The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
9. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.C. as per rules.
|
