Laxman Singh S/O Jale Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 2138 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 280/2021

Laxman Singh S/o Jale Singh, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of
Village Tehdka, Police Station Tatarpur, Bhiwadi District Alwar
(Raj) (At Present In Central Jail Alwar)
                                                                  ----Appellant
                                  Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p
2.     Vinod Kumar S/o Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 23 Years,
       R/o Village Tehdaka Tatarpur Bhiwadi District Alwar (Raj.)
                                                               ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Nand Ram Choudhary For Complainant : Mr. Bheem Sain Bairwa For State : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

04/03/2021

1. Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated

25.01.2021 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of

Atrocities) Cases Alwar, whereby, bail application filed by the

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

2. F.I.R. No.78/2020 was registered at Police Station Tatarpur

Bhiwadi, District Alwar (Raj.) for offence under Sections 323, 341,

34, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that deceased

died due to shock as a result of the cumulative effect of the

injuries sustained by the deceased. It is also contended that the

injury caused on the head is not assigned to the present

(2 of 2) [CRLAS-280/2021]

petitioner.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant

have opposed the appeal. It is contended that both Laxman Singh

and Kamal Singh have given blows to the deceased, and since the

cause of death is the result of the injuries sustained by the

deceased both are responsible for the offence under Section 302

IPC. It is also contended that there is an eye witness who has

seen the incident.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

State and counsel for the complainant, I am not inclined to

entertain the appeal.

7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is dismissed.

8. However, petitioner would be free to move fresh bail

application after recording the statement of material witness

before the concerned Court.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /34

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)