AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 311 wordsGurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J
None for the respondent No.2/complainant.
It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the complainant has been informed about the pendency of this appeal as required under Section 15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short Act, 1989 ).
Case diary is available.
This second repeat appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Act against the order dated 11/11/2022 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Shivpuri rejecting the bail application. First appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 01/07/2022 passed in CRA No.5322/2022.
The appellant has been arrested on 15/11/2021 in connection with Crime No.201/2021 registered by Police Station Bamorekalan, District Shivpuri for offence punishable under Sections 302, 324, 323, 294, 506 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(da), 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.
It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that all the material witnesses have been examined and they have turned hostile. It is further submitted that the death took place because of drained wound found on both side of the abdomen but in the FIR which was lodged by the deceased himself there is no mention of causing injury on the abdomen region of the deceased, which clearly means that the deceased died because of medical complications.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State. It is submitted that the FIR lodged by the deceased himself and his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. would fall within the category of dying declaration as defined under Section 32 of Evidence Act.
In view of the submissions made by the counsel for the State, the counsel for the appellant seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this appeal with liberty to revive the prayer after the examination of the autopsy surgeon.
With aforesaid liberty, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
