Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2553 of 2020 Appellant :- Anokhe Lal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Pati Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant is taken on record.
Heard Sri Alok Tiwari and Rakesh Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri, Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as amended Act, 2015 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 27.08.2020, passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Pilibhit in Case Crime No. 66 of 2020 and Session Case No. 350 of 2020, under Sections - 304, 452, 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C. and Section - 3 (2) (5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Deoriya Kalan, District - Pilibhit.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence. General and vague allegations have been made against the appellant. It was not specified in particular as to the manner in which the assault was caused. The weapons used cannot be said to be deadly but the quarrel was sudden and on account of provocation extended between both the sides and there was no specific motive to commit the offence, as such. The development of this case took place on the date of incident 30.04.2020 and the F.I.R. was lodged the very same day. In fact, it so happened that the wife of the appellant had lodged some criminal report against the deceased as well as the sons of the deceased and because of that, the informant side was annoyed and falsely implicate the appellant in this case. The appellant is languishing in jail since 27.05.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and claimed that the injured himself has categorically stated about the injury being caused to him by the appellant and the other accused also assisted him, while assaulting on the spot.
Learned A.G.A. has adopted the contention of the learned counsel for the informant.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal.
Nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the complainant/ State so as to justify and sustain the order passed by the court below rejecting the bail application of the appellant.
Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence, complicity of accused, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 27.08.2020, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Anokhe Lal involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
It is made clear that observation made in this order shall not be construed to have any reflection on merits of the case and shall not prejudice the trial court while deciding the trial.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021 S Rawat