DILIP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is facing trial for the offences u/Ss. 398,395,396,397,300/ 149 I.P.C. The Trial Court has already framed the charges and the dates 18, 20 and 21st Sep., 1990 was fixed for recording the statement of the prosecution Witnesses. However, the record of the Trial Court was summoned by this Court and order dt. 7-9-90, as such, the statement of the witnesses could not be recorded.

(2.) The argument of the learned counsel is that co-accused Udai Ram has been released on bail by this Court vide Order dt. 19-6-90 and the case of the petitioner is at par. He further submits that co-accused Nand Lal has also been granted bail and as such the petitioner should also be given the benefit of bail.

(3.) So far the petitioner is concerned, he has been identified by a number of eye-witnesses who are said to be present at the time of commission of the crime at the house of Mahaveer Prasad As already stated above the Trial Court had fixed the dates for recording the prosecution evidence and as such it will not be in the interest of justice to minutely make comment on the merits of the case. Suffice it to say that it is not the case where there is no evidence against the petitioner. Whether the evidence of identification by the witnesses could be relied upon or not is a matter which can properly be appreciated at the stage of deciding the case.