CHAIN SINGH 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. 6/3/2019 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Case, Merta (hereinafter to be referred as 'trial court') in Criminal Misc. Case No. 67/2019 (12/2019) pertaining to Sessions Case No. 125/2017, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant.

(2.) The appellant has been arrested in FIR No. 87/2017 of Police Station Khunkhuna, District Nagaur for the offences punishable under Sec. 302 IPC and Sec. 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the police have filed charge-sheet against the appellant while concluding that the appellant committed murder of father of complainant-Narendra. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that complainant-Narendra, in his police statements, has alleged that his father was with the appellant before his death and he is having doubt that the appellant committed murder of his father. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that thereafter the police have recorded the statements of Bhawani Singh, Anand Singh, Ugam Singh and Babu Lal, who have stated in their statements that the appellant called them in the night of 31/5/2017 and informed that father of complainant-Narendra died on account of his beating. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that now the statements of complainant-Narendra has been recorded as PW-2 and the statements of other persons viz. Bhawani Singh, Anand Singh, Ugam Singh have been recorded as PW-4, PW-5 and PW-6 respectively before the trial court. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that PW-4 Bhawani Singh, PW-5 Anand Singh and PW-6 Ugam Singh have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that PW-2 complainant- Narendra, in his statement, has specifically stated that though he did not see the appellant assaulting his father but he is making this statement only on the basis of doubt. It is also submitted that PW-2 complainant-Narendra, in his statement before the trial court, has specifically admitted that there is no dispute between the appellant and the deceased and relations between them were cordial. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in view of the above referred evidence produced by the prosecution, it is clear that the appellant has not committed any crime.