Vikas Tiwari @ Sonu Pandit vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 7858 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:30945]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1470/2023

Vikas Tiwari @ Sonu Pandit S/o Late Sh. Sukhdev Tiwari, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 2 Kld 0 Rd Dantor Ps Dantor Dist. Bikaner (Presently Lodged At Central Jail Bikaner)

----Appellant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Dulichand S/o Sh. Kasiram, R/o 2 Kjd Khajuwala Dist.

         Bikaner
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)           :    Mr. D.L. Rawla.
                                Mr. Pravesh Kumar Rawla
                                Mr. Jagdish Kumar Vishnoi.
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP.
                                Mr. Mahendra Godara, for complainant.



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                 Judgment

04/10/2023

Heard learned counsel representing the appellant, learned

Public Prosecutor so also learned counsel for the complainant-

respondent No.2. 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 by the order dated

12.07.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention

of Atrocities) Cases, Bikaner, District Bikaner in Cr. Misc. Case

No.1336/2023 (CIS No.1336/2023) rejecting the bail application

preferred on behalf of the appellant who is in custody in

connection with FIR No.162/2023, Police Station Khajuwala,

[2023:RJ-JD:30945] (2 of 5) [CRLAS-1470/2023]

District Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 376-D and 302

IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(Vi) and 3(2)(Vii) of the SC/ST Act.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned

counsel submitted that as per the FIR, co-accused Dinesh Bishnoi,

Bhagirath and Manoj committed sexual assault-rape upon

deceased Mst. 'S' who was aged about 20 years. It was submitted

that as per the FIR, Mst. 'S' died due the alleged incident.

Learned counsel submitted that the appellant has not been

named in the FIR. Learned counsel further submitted that there is

no direct evidence available on record indicating involvement of

the appellant in the commission of alleged crime. Learned counsel

vehemently submitted that as a matter of fact, the deceased was

having consensual relationship with main accused- Dinesh Kumar

and on the date of alleged incident, the deceased and main-

accused mutually exchanged several mobile calls, whereafter, the

deceased voluntarily reached the place of incident and developed

physical relationship with main accused, however, due to

excessive bleeding during intercourse, the deceased passed away.

It was submitted that the chain of events thus, suggest that the

appellant is in no way connected with the commission of alleged

crime. Learned counsel also submitted that the appellant who is

aged about 33 years is in judicial custody since 05.07.2023; no

recovery is due to be made from him.

Learned counsel lastly submitted that challan against the

appellant has already been filed and even as per the challan, the

appellant had not sexually assaulted-raped the deceased. The trial

of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time.

[2023:RJ-JD:30945] (3 of 5) [CRLAS-1470/2023]

On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the

appellant on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for

the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application.

Drawing attention of the Court towards the charge sheet

submitted by the investigating agency before competent criminal

court after making thorough investigation into the matter, learned

counsel submitted that the appellant has committed heinous

offences punishable with life imprisonment and minimum sentence

of twenty years.

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the

complainant further submitted that from the perusal of the charge

sheet prepared by the investigating agency after analyzing the

statements of various witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC

and CCTV footage obtained during the course of investigation, it is

evident that the appellant not only reached the place of the

incident with main accused- Dinesh Kumar but was also guarding

the place of incident, by sitting in a room adjacent to the room

where the deceased was subjected to sexual assault. It was jointly

submitted that as per the challan papers, the appellant on coming

to know about the fact that Mst. 'S' has succumbed to the sexual

assault, ran away from the place of occurrence.

Lastly, it was submitted that not only sufficient evidence is

available on record indicating active involvement of the appellant

in the commission of alleged crime but the record of the case also

shows that the appellant had concealed the incident from police

and also aided the main-accused Dinesh Kumar in hiding after the

incident.

[2023:RJ-JD:30945] (4 of 5) [CRLAS-1470/2023]

Learned counsel thus, prayed that looking to the seriousness

of accusations against the appellant, he does not deserve

concession of bail in the present case.

Having considered rival submissions, facts and circumstances of

the case, this Court prima facie finds that during the course of

investigation, presence of the appellant in a room adjacent to the

room where alleged incident took place has been established. This

Court also prima facie finds that the CCTV footage recovered

during investigation, of the date when alleged incident ocurred

also prima facie indicates involvement of the appellant in alleged

crime. The argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the

prosecutrix and main accused were known to each other

previously and had exchanged number of calls on the date of

alleged incident and the prosecutrix voluntarily reached the place

of incident cannot be appreciated at this stage when the

deposition of the Investigating Officer and the complainant have

not yet been recorded before competent criminal court.

This Court at this juncture prima facie finds that challan

papers prima facie establish the guilt of the appellant and

therefore, this Court keeping in view the seriousness of

accusations and severity of punishment finds it difficult to accept

the prayer to enlarge the appellant on bail at this stage. Thus, the

application for bail is rejected.

It is however, made clear that the appellant shall be at

liberty to renew his prayer for bail after recording of the

statements of the complainant and Investigating Officer before

competent criminal court.

[2023:RJ-JD:30945] (5 of 5) [CRLAS-1470/2023]

It is expcted from the competent criminal court that the

statements of complainant and Investigating Officer will be

recorded on priority basis.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)