Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4780 of 2021 Appellant :- Awadhesh Kumar Pandey Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Saurabh Basu,Yashwant Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Jitendra Singh,Pradyumna Kumar Yadav,Vineet Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Basu, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and; Sri Pradyumna Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 22.9.2021, passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad, in Case Crime No. 402 of 2020, under Sections - 376(2)(N), 328, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)V of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Cantt., District - Prayagraj, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 27.11.2020, the appellant is in confinement since 4.8.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation; the appellant has no criminal history; charge-sheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, for the purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted, the victim girl is more than 30 years of age. She had formed a consensual relationship with the appellant about 5 years ago, as has been stated by her during investigation. On account of that relationship having failed, false accusation has emerged. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, at present, the order passed by the learned court below rejecting the bail application filed by the appellant/s, cannot be sustained.
6. Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts and submissions and having regard to the status of the evidence, as has been shown to exist on record, let the appellant/s be enlarged on bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 22.9.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
8. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Awadhesh Kumar Pandey involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds 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.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Prakhar