SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Raj) 2166

ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Kalusingh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Shrawan Singh Rathore, Advocate, Mukhtiyar Khan, Advocate, Bheema Ram, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Anoop Kumar Dhand, J. - The appeal, under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ?Act of 1989?), is preferred by appellants to assail impugned order dated 06.10.2021, passed by Special Court, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Balotra (for short, ?learned trial Court?) rejecting their bail application.

2. Complainant lodged FIR No.148/2021, registered at Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer against appellants attributing offences under Sections 341, 323 & 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(w), 3(1)(Da) (Dha), 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants after investigation, police has submitted charge-sheet against the appellants for the offence under Sections 341, 323 & 306 IPC and 3(2)(w), 3(1)(Da) (Dha), 3(2)(va) of the Act of 1989. He further states that there is no evidence against the appellants that they abated or instigated deceased to commit suicide. It is also submitted by learned counsel that after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take its own time.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top