Vijaypal @ Vijay Singh Son of Shri Ramswaroop vs State of Rajasthan

Accused-appellant Vijay @ Vijay Singh has laid this appeal

under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ''Act of 1989'')

to assail impugned order dated 03.10.2017 passed by Special

Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities), Hanumangarh (for short, ''learned trial Court'') rejecting

his bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. arising out of FIR

No.121/2017 of Police Station Hanumangarh Sadar, District

Hanumangarh.

The facts of the case are that complainant lodged FIR

against appellant and two others for offence under Sections 302,

447, 427, 323, 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989.

However, as there was scuffle between the complainant partly as

well as accused persons, accused Ram Kumar suffered firearm

injury and expired. Eventually upon completion of investigation,

Police submitted charge-sheet in the matter for aforesaid offences

against appellant and co-accused Sunderpal.

It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that in fact,

complainant party was aggressor and they have used firearm and

due to the injury of firearm, Ram Kumar expired and his other

accomplice also suffered injuries. Learned counsel has further

submitted that a bare perusal of the material collected during

investigation makes it abundantly clear that role assigned to the

appellant and Sunderpal is identical. Learned counsel has urged

that the allegations against the appellant that he has given hit to

the deceased Hardev with the vehicle in FIR are prima facie not

found true and during investigation, it was unfurled that he has

been attributed role of giving blow by use of lathi. Learned

counsel has further contended that same role is assigned to co-

accused Sunderpal and he has been enlarged on bail by the

learned trial Court. Learned counsel has therefore urged that case

of the appellant is not distinguishable from co-accused Sunderpal

and therefore, impugned order merits annulment.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal. It is

argued by learned Public Prosecutor that in the FIR main role is

assigned to the appellant and therefore, no interference with the

impugned order is warranted.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments

advanced at the Bar and perused the materials available on record.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I

am unable to find any discriminatory features between the role of

Sunderpal and the appellant for commission of alleged offence.

Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed, the impugned

order passed by learned trial Court is set aside and it is ordered

that accused-appellant, Vijaypal @ Vijay Singh Son of Shri

Ramswaroop, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.121/2017

Police Station Hanumangarh Sadar, District Hanumangarh, may be

released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of

Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the

satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear

before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called

upon to do so.