MAHESH SINGH AKA BHAUDA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These criminal appeals under Sec. 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the SC/ST Act') have been filed on behalf of the appellants being aggrieved with the orders dtd. 28/9/2022 and 3/9/2022 respectively passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Merta (hereinafter to be referred as 'trial court') in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.218/2022 and 201/2022 respectively, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail applications filed on behalf of the appellants.

(2.) The appellants have been arrested in FIR No.109/2018 of Police Station Chitawa, District Nagaur for the offences punishable under Sec. 376D of IPC and Ss. 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that allegation of sexual assault levelled by the complainant against the appellants are absolutely false and FIR has been lodged on account of political enmity. It is further submitted that after rejection of the earlier bail applications of the appellants, statements of victim (PW-1), her daughter (PW-3) and nephew Sonu Ram (PW-4) have been recorded. PW-4 Sonu Ram has not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that from the statements of victim (PW-1) and her daughter (PW-3), it is clear that they have improved their statements a lot and this posses serious doubt about their testimony. Learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted that there are series of houses situated in between villages, however, no independent witness has been corroborated the story of prosecution. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that victim, in her statement, alleges that the appellants brutally raped her as well as assaulted her but according to medical report, no such injury has been found on the body of the victim. It is also submitted that appellants are in custody from last more than four years, however, till date 16 prosecution witnesses have been examined. Learned counsel further prayed that the appellants are liable to be enlarged on bail.