Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5982 of 2017 Appellant :- Amit Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Brahma Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
In the counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. for the State, it is stated that notice has been served upon opposite party no.2, yet no one has appeared on his behalf.
Heard Sri Brahma Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This appeal has been filed against judgement and order dated 23.8.2017 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Muzaffar Nagar passed in Bail Application No. 2864 of 2017 (Amit vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 837 of 2017, under Sections 354-A, 326-B, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, P.S. New Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that order of the learned court below rejecting bail application of applicant-appellant is bad in law. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is aged about 26 years. It was alleged that the applicant had thrown acid towards the victim who anyhow escaped unhurt. The F.I.R. was registered under Sections 354 and 506 I.P.C. and based on the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the case was converted under Section 326-B I.P.C. during investigation. However, ultimately the charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 354-A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act on which cognizance has also been taken. The said fact has not been denied in the counter affidavit filed by the State. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of no injury. The prosecutrix is a grown up lady and for ulterior reasons she had levelled allegations against the appellant.Thus, the appellant, who is in jail since 25.7.2017, deserves to be released on bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the appellant.
Having heard the submission of learned counsel of both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that a case for bail has been made out.
In the result, appeal is allowed. The judgement and order dated 23.8.2017 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Muzaffar Nagar is set aside.
Let appellant-applicant-Amit,be released on bail in aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant-appellant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant-appellant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant-appellant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 30.4.2018 MN/-