Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Banwari Lal vs State Of Rajasthan on 9 April, 2021
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 292/2021
1. Banwari Lal S/o Mangi Lal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Ward No. 36, Jaiprakash Colony, Hanumangarh Town,
Police Station Hanumangarh Town, Tehsil And Dist.
Hanumangarh. (At Present Lodged In District Jail
Hanumangarh).
2. Ved Prakash S/o Sh. Mangi Lal, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
Ward No. 36, Jaiprakash Colony, Hanumangarh Town,
Police Station Hanumangarh Town, Tehsil And Dist.
Hanumangarh. (At Present Lodged In District Jail
Hanumangarh).
----Appellants
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Vikas Valmiki S/o Mahendra, R/o Ward No. 19,
Hanumangarh Town, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Mridul Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment
09/04/2021
As per office report, notice of appeal has been served upon
the complainant/respondent No.2. However, no one has appeared
on her behalf despite service.
Heard. Perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant
under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act, 2015 being aggrieved of the order dated
16.01.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention
(2 of 3) [CRLAS-292/2021]
of Atrocities) Cases, Hanumangarh in Criminal Misc Bail Case
No.22/2021 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of
the appellant who is in custody in connection with FIR
No.127/2019, Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District
Hanumangarh, for offences under Section 148, 302/149, 341/149,
323/149, 326/149 IPC and under Section 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of
the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Learned counsel Shri Jain urges that the material prosecution
witnesses viz. Ajay @ Pawan Kumar (PW.1), Rahul (PW.2),
Devendra (PW.3), Rajkumar (PW.4), Ramesh Kumar (PW.5) and
Ravidass (PW.6) have been examined at the trial. None of them
supported the prosecution case and were declared hostile. He also
contended that one more injured namely Vikas has still not been
examined by the trial court but even from his statement under
Section 161 Cr.P.C., it is clear that the petitioner and Narendra @
Nindra reached the spot at a later point of time and that there is
no specific allegation of the said witness regarding the appellants
having inflicted any injury to the deceased Sonu Kanda. He further
points out that the appeal of the co-accused Narendra @ Nindra
has been accepted by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2021 and
thus, the appellant deserves same indulgence.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and
fervently opposed the submissions advanced by appellant's
counsel. However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact
that the eyewitnesses, referred to supra have been declared
hostile at the trial. Even in the statement of the only remaining
eyewitness Vikas, there is no specific allegation against the
present appellants.
(3 of 3) [CRLAS-292/2021]
Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated
16.01.2021 is set aside and it is ordered that the accused-
appellants (1) Banwari Lal S/o Shri Mangilal & (2) Ved Prakash S/o
Shri Mangilal arrested in connection with FIR No.127/2019 Police
Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh shall be
released on bail during pendency of the trial; provided each of
them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety
bonds 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.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J
175-Sudhir Asopa/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
