Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Manish Bijaraniya vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 July, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:31926]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1112/2026
CNR: RJHC010569772026
URN: CRLAS / 2539U / 2026
1. Manish Bijaraniya S/o Lekhram Jat, Aged About 23 Years,
Resident Of Village Sadhasar, Police Station Jasrasar,
District Bikaner (Rajasthan.) (Presently Lodged In District
Jail, Bikaner)
2. Ramratan S/o Kanaram Siyag, Aged About 24 Years,
Resident Of Village Bidasariya, Police Station Jasrasar,
District Bikaner (Presently Lodged In District Jail, Bikaner)
----Appellants
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2. Rameshwarlal S/o Tikuram, Resident Of Gali No.6,
Ambedkar Colony, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner,
Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jogendar Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP
Mr. Ravindra Singh Bhati, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
16/07/2026
1. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that notice issued to
respondent No.2 has been served.
2. Service report dated 12.07.2026 is taken on record.
3. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of
filing an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at the instance of accused-
(Uploaded on 16/07/2026 at 04:48:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/07/2026 at 08:35:14 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:31926] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-1112/2026]
appellants. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated
herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case 1. FIR Number 168/2023 2. Concerned Police Station Jai Narayan Vyas Colony 3. District Bikaner 4. Offences alleged in the FIR Sections 452, 323, 341, 504 and 143 IPC, 1860 5. Offences added, if any Sections 325, 307 and 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ ST Act 6. Date of passing of impugned 05.06.2026 order
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that no case for
the alleged offences is made out against them and their
incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play
in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to
the accused-appellants and they have been made accused
based on conjectures and surmises.
4.1 He further submits that there were three injured persons in
the present case, namely, Rameshwar, Ramkishan and
Basant. Out of these three injured persons, Ramkishan (PW-
3) sustained two injuries out of which one was reported to
be dangerous to life and he deposed that the said injury was
caused by co-accused Fusaram. He submits that
Rameshwarlal (PW-2) sustained one grievous injury,
however, he has made omnibus allegations against all three
accused persons and has not assigned any specific role to
(Uploaded on 16/07/2026 at 04:48:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/07/2026 at 08:35:14 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:31926] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-1112/2026]
the present appellants. Further, injured – Basant sustained
simple injuries.
4.2 Based on these submissions, it is argued that the appellants,
who are in judicial custody since 30.05.2026, are entitled to
be enlarged on bail as the trial will take sufficiently long time
to conclude.
5. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the
appellants, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the appeal and
submits that in the present case, appellants were arrested at
a later stage and as far as the statement of Ramkishan (PW-
3) is concerned, it was recorded while considering the
involvement of co-accused Fusaram as appellants were
absconding at that point of time. Therefore, the present case
is not fit for enlargement of accused – appellants on bail.
6. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Public
Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for
both the parties; the facts and circumstances of the case;
the challan papers so also the statements recorded; injured
– Basant sustained simple injuries; Ramkishan (PW-3) has
sustained injury which is stated to be dangerous to life,
however, he has attributed the same to co-accused Fusaram;
Rameshwarlal (PW-2) has sustained omnibus allegations,
this Court is of the considered view that no fruitful purpose
would be served by keeping the appellants behind bars for
an indefinite period. Thus, without expressing any opinion on
(Uploaded on 16/07/2026 at 04:48:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/07/2026 at 08:35:14 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:31926] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-1112/2026]
merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that
the appeal filed by the appellants deserves to be allowed.
8. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned
order dated 05.06.2026 passed by the learned Special
Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Bikaner is set
aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellants- Manish
Bijaraniya S/o Lekhram Jat and Ramratan S/o
Kanaram Siyag arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR,
shall be released on bail, provided they furnish a personal
bond of Rs.50,000/- each 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.
9. It is however, made clear that findings
recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes
of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not
get prejudiced by the same.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J
47/Amar Purohit/701
(Uploaded on 16/07/2026 at 04:48:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 16/07/2026 at 08:35:14 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
