Bail can be granted when there is no eyewitness testimony and medical evidence suggests alternative causes of death, outweighing the severity of charges.

ORDER :

1. Heard. Perused the material available on record.

2. 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 of the order dated 13.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Sawaimadhopur in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 263/2023 rejecting the bail application preferred on behalf of the appellant who is in custody since 26.11.2022 in connection with FIR No. 364/2022, Police Station Bamanwas, Sawaimadhopur for offences under Sections 365, 302, 120B IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act. Later on, the police filed chargesheet against Kishmant, Dharamveer, Deepak, Vikas and Ashok, appellant herein for offences under Sections 365, 302, 120B IPC, for offences under Sections 365, 302, 120B IPC and Sections 3-2(v), 3-2(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act against the accused Manish and for offences under Sections 365, 302, 120B IPC, Sections 3-2(v), 3-2(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act against the accused Afridi.

3. The first appeal under Section 14A (2) preferred on behalf of the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 14.08.2023 giving liberty to the appellant to renew the prayer for bail after recording statement of the prosecutions witnesses Shivsharan, Bhawani Singh and Rohitash. The statement of these prosecution witnesses have been recorded at trial and thereafter, the appellant has preferred this second appeal for bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act.

4. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant Ramlal submitted a written report at Police Station Bamanwas inter alia alleging that on 25.11.2022, at about 8:00 AM, Dharamveer took his nephew Vedprakash away on his motorcycle from his house. Vedprakash did not return home till 2 O' Clock in the night upon which, he made calls on his mobile phone but he did not receive it. Upon inquiry, he came to know that three boys out of whom, one Kishmat Meena, who is cousin of Vedprakash, took him to Mandawari side in a Swift Car (No. RJ 25 CM 4869). It was also alleged in the report that on the next day, at about 4 O' Clock, he came to know that the dead body of Vedprakash is lying in Ramgarh Pachvara Police Station and police has arrested six persons who were involved in the murder of Vedprakash Meena. These persons were trying to dispose of the dead body in the Ramgarh Pachwara police station area but the police apprehended Kishmat, Afridi, Vikas, Deepak, Manish and Ashok at the spot along with the dead body. The accused persons abducted his nephew Vedprakash and killed him. On the basis of this report, the FIR No. 364/2022 came to be registered at the Police Station Bamanwas District Sawaimadhopur for the aforesaid offences and the police stated investigation. During investigation, the police arrested the accused persons including Ashok, appellant herein on 26.11.2022 and since then, he is in custody.

5. Arguing the instant appeal, learned counsel representing the appellant submitted that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. He contends that there is no eyewitness of the alleged incident as none of the prosecution witness has ever stated that they saw the accused persons murdering the deceased Vedprakash Meena. He submits that as per the prosecution case, PW-5 Shivsharan Meena & PW-6 Bhawani Singh both run private clinics. The deceased Vedprakash was allegedly taken to them for his medical treatment and checkup. However, both these witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile during the course of trial. While referring to the statement of Dr. Ravi Kumar (PW-4), who was one of the member of the medical board who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased Vedprakash, he contends that as pe