Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside order dated 12.8.2020 passed in Bail No.1126 of 2020 Amit Yadav alias Raju versus State of U.P., arising out of case crime No.139 of 2020 (S.T. No.907 of 2020) under sections 302, 120-B I.P.C. and Sections 3(2)(V), 3(2)(V-A) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Jathwara, district Pratapgarh.
Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The offence is alleged to have been committed on 14.4.2020 at about 6.00p.m. The prosecution case is that the informant's son Dheeraj said that he is going with Subhash. It is alleged that Subhash along with the informant's son have taken liquor and after drinking Subhash and his companion murdered the informant's son by cutting his throat from knife. After search, the dead body was found 500 metres away from home near river Bakulahi. Allegation is that the son of the informant has been murdered by Subhash along with his companion.
It is submitted on behalf of the appellant/applicant that the informant in her first statement under Section 161 CrPC has repeated the version of the first information report and no allegation against the applicant has been made. However, on 17.4.2020, while giving reinstatement, she has taken the name of the applicant on the basis of information received by the villagers, however, it has not been disclosed as to who had given information to her. It is alleged by the informant in her statement that as per information received by the villagers, the appellant was also involved in the commission of crime of murder.
There is no last seen evidence against the appellant/applicant. Only after three months from the date of occurrence, role of conspiracy is assigned to him. Nothing has been recovered from the appellant.
The appellant has no criminal history. The appellant is in jail since 23.5.2020.
It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant/applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon merit of the case, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record.
In view of above, the order dated 12.8.2020 (supra) passed by the court below is liable to be and is hereby set aside.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
Let the appellant/applicant Amit Yadav alias Raju involved in Case Crime No. 139 of 2020 (supra) be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 kkb/