DILAWAR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Perused the case diary. The petitioners have been arrested on 11.9.92 in FIR case No. 343/91 Police Station, Rajsamand for the offences under Sec. Sec. 302, 201 and 396 Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that on 14.9.92 petitioners Kashmir Singh and Dilawar Singh gave separate but identical informations under Sec. 27 of the Evidence Act and in pursuance thereof got an unnumbered truck recovered on 17.9.92, from the workshop of Makhanlal, Truck Body Maker, Automobile Nagar, Jaipur. The engine and chassis number of said truck tally with the engine and chassis numbers of alleged looted truck No. PCS 9021. It is alleged that Pilram @ Raju and Moolchand, who were the driver and khalasi respectively of the said truck, were murdered and their truck containing axles was looted and sometimes in May, 1991 their dead bodies were found buried near the national highway falling under the jurisdiction of Police Station, Rajsamand. However, Makhanlal, Body Maker in his statement under Sec. 161 Code Criminal Procedure and his assistant Moolchand have stated that the said truck was brought by one Om, Driver who had asked for getting the truck painted in a different colour, but later on he did not return. These witnesses have not stated anything against the present petitioners, nor their identification parade was conducted.

(3.) Another circumstances against the petitioners is that one of the co-accused Babulal gave an information in July, 1992 to the Investigation Officer of FIR case No. 65/91 Police Station, Mangliawas, district Ajmer, registered under Sections 302, 201, 396, 412, 413, 364, 365 and 120 Indian Penal Code and in pursuance thereof about 40 axles were recovered. Again in that case also the present petitioners were not put in test parade. In the case in hand an incomplete charge-sheet under Sec. 173(8) Code Criminal Procedure has been filed and thereafter, the case diary does not show any progress in the case. Thus the petitioners are under detention since 11.9.92 and the further investigation in trial the case is likely to take considerable time.