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.