Hostile testimony of eighteen prosecution witnesses and lack of incriminating material warrant grant of bail.

The appellant was arrested on 12/06/2025 in connection with Crime No. 340/2025

The prosecution alleged that the appellant, along with co-accused persons, assaulted one Banti alias Sitaram Jatav and threw his body into the Budhna river, where it was discovered on 10/06/2025

The appellant was charged under Sections 103(1), 238, 115(2), and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3(2)(V) of the SC/ST Act

Following the dismissal of his bail application by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Shivpuri, on 09/05/2026, the appellant filed this criminal appeal

Whether the appellant is entitled to be released on bail under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, given that eighteen prosecution witnesses have turned hostile and the investigation is complete

The court applied Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which provides for appeals against orders granting or refusing bail

It also considered Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) regarding bail provisions

The court relied on general principles of criminal jurisprudence concerning bail, specifically the necessity of incriminating evidence, the duration of custody, the likelihood of the trial's conclusion, and the absence of a flight risk or criminal antecedents

Furthermore, it noted the procedural mandate of Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act regarding victim notification

The court noted that the appellant had been in custody since June 2025 and that the investigation was concluded with the filing of a charge sheet, minimizing the need for further custodial interrogation

Crucially, the court found that eighteen prosecution witnesses examined thus far had turned hostile and failed to support the prosecution's case

The State corroborated this fact and failed to point out any other incriminating material from the case diary

Consequently, the court reasoned that since there was no direct evidence currently connecting the appellant to the crime and no history of criminal antecedents, the continued incarceration during a prolonged trial was unwarranted

The court ordered that the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety, subject to conditions including cooperation with the trial, non-tampering with witnesses, and seeking permission before leaving the country