Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 133 of 2020 Appellant :- Avnish @ Pujari Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Prakash Narayan,Ganesh Datta Sharma,Pankaj Sharma,Shiv Nath Singh(Senior Adv.) Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Raj Kumar
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 06.12.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC and ST Act, Auraiya, in case crime no.46 of 2019, under Section 304 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Sahayal, District Auraiya.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on account of village parti- bandi with the malafide intention and they have not committed any offence. The story of the prosecution has been said to be false and baseless. It has been submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant that the offence, if any committed by the appellant, do not travel beyond the scope of Section 323 IPC. There was no motive to commit the offence in question. It is purely an accidental death case. The appellant has no criminal history. He further submits that in case, he is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding and misusing the liberty of bail. It has been assured on behalf of the appellant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make available before the court whenever required. The appellant is languishing in jail since 26.11.2019.
Also heard the learned Additional Government Advocate and learned counsel for the informant.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record as well as the order by which, bail application of the appellant-applicant 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 appellants have made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 06.12.2019 rejecting the bail of the appellant are set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Avnish @ Pujari 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 appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
However, this order will not prejudice the trial court while deciding the case on merit.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021 Raj