KAMAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN-STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal under Sec. 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellants against the order dtd. 13/4/2023 passed by learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Merta, District Nagaur in Cr. Case No.57/2023, whereby the bail application filed by the appellants, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.437/2022 registered at Police Station Kuchaman City, District Nagaur, for offences under Ss. 143, 323, 341, 302, 109, 120 of IPC and Sec. 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been rejected.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements of eyewitnesses namely Amba Lal and Vinay Kumar, learned counsel submitted that aforementioned witnesses in their statements recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. have clearly denied the presence of the present appellants in the Bolero which was ran over the deceased by the co-accused persons. Learned counsel submitted that the eye-witnesses of the incident have clearly stated that the appellants were only standing at the place of incident. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the fact that the appellants were not sitting in the offending vehicle, the appellants deserve to be enlarged on bail.

(3.) Learned counsel submitted that the appellants are in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accusedappellants. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the appeal. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that presence of the present appellants in the offending vehicle prima facie could not be established on the basis of the statements of the eye witnesses though, the appellants have been named in the FIR by the complainant.