Kalluram S/O Shri Mahaveer vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 930 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

            S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2767/2019

Kalluram S/o Shri Mahaveer, R/o Hiyaliya, Police Station Bhinay,
Distt. Ajmer At Present In Custody Central Jail Ajmer. (At Present
Accused Petitioner Confined In Ajmer Central Jail Distt. Ajmer)
                                                                  ----Appellant
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                ----Respondent

Connected With S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1981/2019 Kishan Lal S/o Ganga Ram, R/o Sakhoon, Police Station Narena. (At Present In Central Jail Ajmer)

----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

----Respondent S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2901/2019 Chaman Lal S/o Shri Chagan Lal, R/o Village Hilaniya, P.s. Bhinay Distt. Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer)

----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anirudh Tyagi for Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur present in the Court Mr. Anshuman Saxena present in the Court Mr. Bharat Yadav present in the Court For Respondent(s) : Mr. S Gaharana present in the Court Mr. G K Sharma present in the Court For State : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP Investigating Officers : Mr. Omprakash Kelania, Dy.SP CO, Kolayat, Bikaner Mr. Bansilal, CI, SHO, Kishangarh, Ajmer

(2 of 3) [CRLAS-2767/2019]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

29/01/2021

1. Appellants have preferred these appeals aggrieved by orders

dated 19.11.2019, 28.03.2019 and 30.11.2019 passed by Special

Judge SC/ST Cases, Ajmer, whereby, bail application filed by the

appellants under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.

2. F.I.R. No.116/2018 was registered at Police Station

Kishangarh, Distt. Ajmer for offence under Sections 302 and 201

I.P.C. of Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the appellants that the

appellants have been falsely roped in this case. Recovery has been

shown from each accused, so as to connect accused with the

crime. It is also contended that the statement of witness who had

seen the persons disposing the dead body, was recorded after

twenty five days of recovery of dead body. It is also contended

that no test identification parade was conducted to connect the

appellants with the crime.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant

have opposed these appeals.

5. Investigating officer was directed to remain present in the

Court.

6. As per the Investigating officer, all the co-accused were

together. Their location was also near the place where dead body

was disposed. It is also contended that the recovery has been

effected from each accused and their presence in the CCTV

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-2767/2019]

Footage in Hotel Sagar was also shown. It is further contended

that accused-Kishanlal, who is brother-in-law of the deceased had

got an Insurance Policy of Rs.30,00,000/- issued in favour of the

deceased.

7. I have considered the contentions.

8. Considering the above facts, I am not inclined to entertain

these appeals.

9. Criminal Appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.

10. A copy of this order be placed in connected files.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /63-65

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)