Yogendra Singh Negi vs State Of Rajasthan And Others

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015 being aggrieved by the order dated 02.09.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Merta, District Nagaur in Cr. Misc. Case No.168/2023 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant who is in custody in connection with FIR No.04/2023, Police Station Kotwali Nagaur, District Nagaur, for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304 and 308 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

As per prosecution, the appellant who is a doctor working in a Government Hospital, in an inebriated state caused an accident, resulting in death of one Bhanwar Lal on the spot and miscarriage of a pregnant woman namely Nazia Bano.

This Court vide judgment dated 16.05.2023, dismissed the appeal for bail filed by the appellant, while granting him liberty to file a fresh appeal after recording of the statements of complainant and Smt. Nazia Bano.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in judicial custody since 05.01.2023. Learned counsel further submitted that looking to the nature of offences, the charge against the petitioner will not travel beyond Section 304-A IPC. Learned counsel submitted that the alleged accident took place on 05.01.2023, due to rush and congestion near the hospital gate, when the appellant was driving the offending vehicle and suddenly lost control over the vehicle while the car was passing through a speed breaker. It was thus, submitted that the petitioner neither had motive nor intention to commit the alleged crime.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the statements of the complainant (PW-1) and Smt. Nazia Bano (PW-4) have already been recorded before competent criminal court on 09.06.2023 and 29.08.2023 respectively. Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements, learned counsel submitted that PW-1 in his court statements has supported the prosecution story whereas PW-4 has turned hostile. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the fact that statements of complainant and also eye-witness of the incident (PW-1) and injured (PW-4) have already been recorded, there is no apprehension of material witnesses being influenced by the petitioner or the petitioner tampering with any of the evidence; no recovery is due to be made from present petitioner; trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time.

On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the appellant on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application.

Heard learned counsel representing the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant.

Perused the material available on record.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and after having perused the statements of PW-1, PW-4 and other eye witnesses namely Salaudin (PW-3), Raisa (PW-5) and Umrao (PW-6), this Court prima facie finds that though, the complainant has supported the prosecution story but other eye witnesses of the alleged incident have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile. This Court also prima facie finds that since, the statements of the most of the eye-witnesses have already been recorded before competent criminal court, it is now for the competent criminal court to evaluate the statements of the eye witnesses, on the basis evidence adduced before it. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the remaining witnesses or tampering with the evidence; there is no apprehension of the petitioner fleeing away from the country; the petitioner is in judicial custody since 05.01.2023; trial likely to take time, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 02.09.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Merta, District Nagaur is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Yogendra Singh Negi S/o Sh. Gopal Singh Negi arrested in connection with FIR No.04/2023, Police Station Kotwali Nagaur, District Nagaur shall be released on bail during pendency of the trial; provided he furnishes personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the 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.