DHULA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

(2.) The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 285/2018 of Police Station Gogunda, District Udaipur for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 IPC. He has preferred this bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that there is no eye witness who claims that the petitioner committed murder of deceased Nathu. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that only the son of co-accused Banshi Lal has alleged that the petitioner and Kamlesh confessed before him that they murdered his father. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the evidence of so called extra judicial confession collected by the police is weak type of evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that co-accused Banshi Lal has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial of the case will take time.