ADIL PATHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two criminal appeals preferred by appellants-accused Adil Pathan S/o Shri Atik Mohammed and Shayal @ Sahil Khan S/o Sheru Khan, filed under Sec. 14A (2) of SC/ST (POA) Act after dismissal of their bail applications on 7/7/2025/15/9/2025 by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Kota in the matter arising out of FIR No.126/2025 registered at Police Station Anantpura, District Kota City for the offence under Ss. 115(2), 126(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, 'BNS'), 2023.

(2.) Learned counsel for appellants submitted that appellants are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated. They further submitted that prima facie, no case for the offence charged is made out against the appellants-accused. They further referred the police investigation and submitted that the appellants are no more required for any investigation as investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed. They also submitted that the appellants were arrested on 25/6/2025 and since then, they are in custody. They further submitted that the disposal of case will take its own time and keeping appellants behind the bars would serve no purpose so they are entitled to be released on bail.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant Adil Pathan submitted that the incident was occurred on 27/4/2025 for which a report was registered on 29/4/2025 by complainant Monu and in the report, two persons were named with two unknown persons for assault upon injured. He further referred test identification parade of Adil Pathan and submitted that the injured has clearly indicated and named Adil Pathan as the person who accompanied the accused, who assaulted him (injured Vishal Paridwal). He submitted that at the time of identification, injured did not name present appellant as the person who assaulted him. He further referred recovery memo and submitted that a knife was recovered at the instance of possession of Shayal @ Sahil Khan. He also submitted that there is only one injury upon injured and the assignment is upon Shayal @ Sahil Khan and not upon present appellant. At last, he submitted that present appellant was charged with aid of Sec. 3(5) of BNS.