RAM NIWAS RALIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(RAJ)-1991-8-14
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on August 16,1991

RAM NIWAS RALIYA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SHARMA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. So far as the accused petitioners Ram Niwas Raliya S/o Daularam Raliya and Prahlad S/o Shri Manohar Singh are concerned, I find no case for granting theni pre-arrest bail as each of them used sharp-edged weapon. So far as other accused persons are concerned, they have not used sharp edged weapon and the occurrence has taken place all of sudden. In FIR it is not alleged that any beating was given with intention to humuliate Omkarmal Meena who is a member of Scheduled Tribe.
(2.) IN my opinion, before bar of Section 18 of the SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 can be attracted and it can be said that Section 438 of the Act (sic Cr. P. C) not applicable, the first pre-condition that prima facie there must be an atrocity committed on a member of Scheduled Tribe as defined in Section 3 of the Scheduled Caste/scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. I am of the opinion that prima facie the said Section 3 of the Act does not appear to be attracted as any atrocity does not appear to have been committed. I therefore, allow this bail application. The SHO/ Arresting Officer/investigating Officer, Police Station Adrash Nagar Ajmer, in FIR No. 59/91, is therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of petitioners Mahesh Kumar S/o Shri Toda Ram, Satyanarayan Dhakar s/o Shri Kishanlal, Suresh Chand Yadav S/o S. R. Yadav and Babulal Dhakar S/o Shri Kalyanmal Dhakar they shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) with one surety in the like amount each to his satisfaction on the following conditions: - 1. that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2. that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court, or any police officer, and 3. that the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. .;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.