Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4811 of 2021 Appellant :- Amit Kushwaha Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Siya Ram Verma,Deepak Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ravi Sahu
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Janardhan Prakash, learned AGA for the State and; Sri Ravi Sahu, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 8.2.2021, passed by learned 2nd Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ramabai Nagar/Kanpur Dehat, in Case Crime No. 14 of 2021, under Sections - 302 and 201 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Ghatampur, District - Kanpur Nagar, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 9.1.2021, the appellant is in confinement since then; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation; charge-sheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, for the purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted, there is no direct or credible substantial evidence. The deceased was not last seen by the appellant. Merely because the witnesses claim that they have last seen the appellant going towards their agricultural field in the night hours, no inference can be drawn on that basis only. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, at present, the order passed by the learned court below rejecting the bail application filed by the appellant, cannot be sustained.
6. Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts and submissions and having regard to the status of the evidence, as has been shown to exist on record, let the appellant be enlarged on bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 8.2.2021 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
8. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Amit Kushwaha, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Prakhar