JITENDRA TANWAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel representing the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

(2.) This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant under Sec. 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015 being aggrieved by the order dtd. 27/7/2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Bikaner in Cr. Misc. Case No.1432/2023 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant who is in custody in connection with FIR No.156/2022, Police Station Nayashahar, District Bikaner, for the offences under Ss. 323, 341, 147, 148 and 149 IPC and Ss. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has not been named in the FIR. Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements of the eye-witnesses Devilal and Bhanwar Lal recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C., learned counsel submitted that both the eye-witnesses have not named the present appellant. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of statements of co-accused Sameer. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that no recovery has been effected from the present appellant whereas recoveries of weapons allegedly used in commission of crime have been effected from other co-accused persons. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in custody since 19/4/2023; challan has already been filed and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the appellant on bail.