MADAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal 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') has been filed on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the order dtd. 8/5/2019 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Pratapgarh (hereinafter to be referred as 'trial court') in Criminal Misc. Case No. 18/2019, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant.

(2.) The appellant has been arrested in FIR No. 50/2018 of Police Station Hathunia, District Pratapgarh for the offences punishable under Ss. 302, 201 and 379 IPC and Sec. 3(2)(V)(VI) of SC/ST Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no direct evidence is collected by the police to conclude that the appellant committed murder of the deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the police have relied upon the police statements of some of the witnesses, wherein they have alleged that in the evening of 8/4/2018 they saw the appellant and the deceased together and in the morning of 9/4/2018 dead body of deceased was found. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the charge-sheet the police have concluded that as some of the last scene witnesses have confirmed that the deceased was in company of the appellant soon before the incident, it is clear that the appellant committed murder of the deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that out of those last scene witnesses, three witnesses have already been examined before the trial court as PW-1 Iqbal, PW-2 Shankar an PW-3 Madan and all of them have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile and have specifically stated that they had not seen the petitioner with the deceased a day prior to the incident. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the statements of wife of the deceased PW-4 Smt. Sunita have been recorded before the trial court and in her cross examination, though she denied that her husband was in habit of taking liquor but admitted that her husband often used to fell down from the motorcycle and on account of that his motorcycle got damaged many times. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that there is all possibility that the deceased after consuming liquor fell down from the motorcycle and on account of that he received injuries, which resulted into his death. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that once the last seen witnesses have not supported the prosecution story, it is clear that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case.