VINOD JAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as.the Learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no connecting evidence against the petitioners so as to make them accused, even copper material was recovered from a truck, which was not found in the possession of anyone including the petitioners. It is stated that the only connecting evidence is the recovery of the dead body at the instance of the petitioners but neither recovery is trustworthy nor the identification of body because the body was found in decomposed condition, thus body could not be identified, hence looking to all these circumstances, petitioners are entitled for grant of bail.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, have opposed this bail application and submits that there exists connecting evidence in view of the fact that deceased was a truck driver of the truck loaded with copper worth of Rs.62 lacs and was to be delivered at Mumbai but when the material did not reach at the destination, an F.I.R. was lodged making allegations against the driver and the truck owner bearing truck owner bearing truck No. RJ18 GA 1096. It is also stated that on recovery of the material in another truck bearing truck No, RJ 18 GA0270, which otherwise found to be moving along with earlier truck driven by the deceased, thus based on that and the recovery of the toll tax documents of the trucks, petitioners were arrested and on their instance, dead body was recovered from a well. It is further stated that recovery at the instance of the petitioners is even a material evidence at this stage, thus Court may go in the question as to whether the identification of the body is proper or not as it is the subject matter of the trial. It is stated that in the post-mortem report, it has come that body was tied up by the rope and is the case of strangulation, thus looking to the prima facie case against the petitioners, their may not be granted bail.