VIRENDRASINGH @ VIRIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that the eye witness namely Umesh (PW-1), in his examination-in- chief, has not named the petitioner. It is further submitted that no other incriminating evidence is available on record to suggest that the petitioner was involved in the commission of crime in any manner.

(3.) Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 18/7/2019 and till date, the trial against him has not been concluded. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.