The Rajasthan High Court recently rejected the bail plea of three individuals accused of participating in the lynching of a man suspected of raping the minor daughter of one of them.

Justice Anil Kumar Upman remarked that mob-lynching is intolerable in a civilized society, emphasizing that we do not reside in a primitive society where individuals are permitted to administer justice through vigilante actions.

''People are not allowed to take law in their hands ''

Further, the Court said, 

"This mob-lynching practice is not acceptable in civilized society at any cost. We are not living in a barbarian society.

The first information report (FIR) against the accused was filed for various offenses under Sections 147 (rioting), 149 (participation in unlawful assembly with common criminal intent), 342 (wrongful confinement), 382 (theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt, or restraint), 386 (extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), 302 (murder), and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act (offense under IPC against a member of SC or ST).

Following the investigation, the chargesheet detailed all the offenses listed in the FIR except for Section 382 of the IPC. Subsequently, the accused applied for bail in the trial court, but their requests were denied. Dissatisfied with this decision, they appealed to the High Court.

The appellants argued that they were falsely accused in the case. They asserted that the deceased individual had visited the residence of two appellants, who were siblings, and had allegedly raped the minor daughter of one of the siblings before sustaining injuries while attempting to flee.

The accused further emphasized that according to police statements, the deceased individual had already been assaulted by villagers, and there was no eyewitness testimony implicating the appellants in the commission of the alleged crime.

In court, Public Prosecutor SK Mahala highlighted that the fourth accused was granted bail on the grounds of being a woman, and also because no specific role had been attributed to her in the alleged crime.

He alleged that the accused not only beat the deceased individual but also obstructed the police from transporting him to a hospital, ultimately leading to his demise. The Court took note of the accusations regarding the severe beating and the interference with police efforts to transfer the victim to medical care.

After considering all the facts, including the severity of the offense and the nature of the allegations, the Court concluded that it was not inclined to grant bail. Consequently, it dismissed the appeal.

Case Title: Darshan Singh and Ors. v State of Rajasthan and Anr