Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3697 of 2021 Appellant :- Babli Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Deepak Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Gyan Prakash Mishra
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Gyan Prakash Mishra learned counsel for the informant; Sri Ashwani Prakash Tripathi learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
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 06.7.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Bulandshahr, in Case Crime No. 191 of 2021, under Sections - 307, 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Ahmadgarh, District - Bulandshahr, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 04.6.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 07.6.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; the appellant has no criminal history; chargesheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted that though the appellant is named in the FIR, specific role of causing assault has been assigned to other named co-accused namely Lala, Ompal and Indrajeet; though nine injuries have been caused to the injured, at present role assigned to the appellant is of exhortation; thus it has been submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated; in any case he has been over implicated in the occurrence with which he had no connection other than being a neighbour who may have been perceived to be close to the other assailants. 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 counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have 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, cannot be sustained.
6. Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts & submissions and having regard to the status of the evidence, as has been shown to exist on record, let the appellant be enlarged on bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 06.7.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
8. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Babli, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two heavy 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.
9. It is made clear that, in the event of any attempt being made by the applicant to intimidate the witness or to tamper the evidence, the informant shall be at liberty to file a bail cancellation application supported by the relevant material, that application if filed, may be taken up on priority.
Order Date :- 24.12.2021 Faraz