Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4000 of 2019 Appellant :- Arif Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 6.5.2019 passed by In- charge Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No. 2, Auraiya in Bail Application No. 550 of 2019 (State Vs. Arif and another), arising out of Case Crime no. 176 of 2018, under Sections 279, 427, 323, 504, 506, 386, 387 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V), 3(1)(Da) and 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Phaphund, District- Auraiya, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
In para- 3 of the counter affidavit filed by Circle Officer, Ajeetmal, District- Auraiya, it has been stated that notice regarding filing of the aforesaid appeal has been given to the complainant, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. CA-1 to the counter affidavit, however despite service of notice, no one has appeared on his behalf.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that on account of certain dispute regarding hitting of motor-cycle, there has been altercation between the appellant and first informant and infact the appellant had not assaulted the victim as there is no injury found on the person of the victim. It is alleged that if the victim will come to visit the exhibition, then he shall pay a sum of Rs. 500/- else would be killed, which is cooked up and concocted just to give colour to the whole incident and infact no such incident has taken place and only on account of altercation, the present prosecution case has been cooked up. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that looking to the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie a case for bail is made out. Lastly, it is submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 6.5.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. The criminal history of the appellant has been explained in paragraph-3 of the supplementary affidavit.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that appellant is in jail since 6.5.2019.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, the appeal has substance.
The impugned order dated 6.5.2019 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No. 2, Auraiya, is set- aside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.
Let the appellant Arif be released on bail in Case Crime No. 176 of 2018, under Sections 279, 427, 323, 504, 506, 386, 387 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V), 3(1)(Da) and 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Phaphund, District- Auraiya, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The 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 appellant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The 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 appellant to prison.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019 KU