Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mamta vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:40523) on 11 September, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:40523]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1766/2023
Mamta D/o Mularam, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Sathiyon Ka Bas
Indarwada Tehsil Rani Dist. Pali
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Mishri Devi W/o Mohanlal, Indarwada Rani Pali
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4363/2023
Govind Singh S/o Heersingh Ji, Aged About 50 Years, B/c
Rajpoot, R/o Odwasiya, Tehsil Rani, Dist. Pali.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Mishri Devi W/o Mohanlal, R/o Indarwada Rani, Pali.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. UK Vyas.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. HS Jodha, PP.
Mr. Deepak Lilawat a/w Mr. Anil
Choudhary.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
11/09/2025
1. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners
under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section
482 Cr.P.C.), seeking quashing of the impugned FIR and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that
the impugned FIR is nothing but a counterblast to the earlier FIR
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 07:44:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40523] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-1766/2023]
bearing No.192/2022, registered at Police Station Rani, District
Pali. He submits that in the said FIR, the Investigating Officer had
initially proposed a negative final report. However, on the
application filed by the petitioner-Mamta, the learned trial Court,
by a detailed order dated 18.02.2023, directed re-investigation.
Despite such specific directions, the Investigating Officer again
filed a final report, against which a revision petition filed by the
petitioner is pending consideration.
3. learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance on
paragraph No.4 of the judgment rendered by the High Court of
Kerala in the case of Jafar Sadhik Thangal & Ors. Vs. State of
Kerala [Bail Application No.8763 of 2019], decided on
17.12.2019, which reads as under:-
"4. Be that as it may, it has been noted at the outset that all
the offences in relation to Sec.354A and the sub-sections thereto
are all bailable offences going by the part-I of the Schedule
appended to the Cr.P.C, which deals with the classification of the
offences. The offence as per Sec.3(1)(va) of the Scheduled Caste/
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is only in relation
to committing an offence in the IPC, which is included in the
Schedule of the to the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
as amended. Sec.3(2)(va) stipulates that whoever, not being a
member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe-commits any
offence specified in the Schedule, against a person or property,
knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste on a
Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall
be punishable with such punishment as specified under the Indian
Penal Code, for such offences and shall also be liable to fine. All
the offences included in the Schedule to the SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 are the offences mentioned therein as per
the IPC. Sec.354A of the IPC is one such offence. So if the
offence in IPC which is included in the Schedule to the SC/ST Act
is a bailable offence, then the offence as per Sec.3(2)(va) for
commencing such scheduled IPC offence is also a bailable
offence. The provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 as amended does not make any specific special
provisions, regarding as to whether any offences as per the said
Act are bailable or non- bailable or as to whether it is cognizable
or non-c0gnizable. Therefore, then it will have to depend on the
classification of offences in Part-II of the Schedule appended to
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 07:44:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40523] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-1766/2023]
the Cr.P.C is related to the classification of offences. Since the
offence as per Sec.354A and the various sub-sections thereto are
bailable offences, it goes without saying that the offence as per
Sec.3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, for
allegedly having committed the abovesaid IPC offences in the
Schedule to the said Act, will also be a bailable offence, so long
as the principal offences as per the IPC are bailable offences.
Hence, suffice to say that in the instant case, the offences alleged
against the petitioner are those punishable under Secs.354A and
its various sub-sections and Sec.3(2)(va) of the SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Since that is the position, all
the above alleged offences are bailable offences. Further, as all
the above alleged offences are thus bailable offences, the plea for
anticipatory bail under Sec.438 Cr.P.C., which is only in respect
of non-bailable offences, is redundant and cannot be pressed into
service. Hence, the proper remedy of the petitioners is to move
the competent court concerned (viz., Special Court concerned)
for bail as per Sec.436 of the Cr.P.C, which is for bailable
offences. In a case like this, where the accused person
approaches the Special Court concerned and makes an
application under Sec.436 of the Cr.P.C, the said court is obliged
to grant bail, as all the offences alleged therein are bailable
offences. The position in that regard is declared and ordered."
4. Learned counsel further submits that the present petitions
may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to furnish bail
bonds at the stage of filing of the charge-sheet.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned Public
Prosecutor oppose the submissions made on behalf of the
petitioners. They submit that, in the present impugned FIR,
investigation has revealed sufficient material against the
petitioners and charges have been found proved. It is further
submitted that though the charge-sheet has been prepared, since
the allegations also involve offences under the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the
charge-sheet has not yet been filed without the requisite sanction.
6. In the peculiar factual matrix, the present petitions are
disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to submit their requisite
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 07:44:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40523] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-1766/2023]
bail bonds before the learned trial Court at the time of filing of the
charge-sheet and the date of filing of the charge-sheet shall be
informed by the Investigating Officer to the petitioners; in case
they fail to do so, the learned trial court shall be free to proceed
strictly in accordance with law. Further, the petitioners shall also
have a liberty to take up all their issues, before the learned trial
Court, at appropriate stage.
7. All pending applications also stand disposed of.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
8-9-Jitender
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 07:44:43 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
