Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Bagish Kannojiya vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2908 of 2018 Appellant :- Bagish Kannojiya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Surendra Nath Dubey,Sachin Dubey,Suresh Bahadur Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14A (2) of The Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'Act, 1989') has been filed on behalf of the appellant, challenging the order dated 14.05.2018 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Basti, in Bail Application No. 30 of 2018 (Bagish Kannojiya v. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 0022 of 2018, under Sections 376-D, 504, 506, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)V of Act, 1989, Police Station - Nagar, District - Basti, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that in the first information report and statement under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., 1973, the prosecutrix has not assigned any role to the appellant. In her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., 1973, it is stated that the appellant had sent co-accused Deepak Sharma and Matthu to commit rape on her. He contended that there is no evidence to this fact. He further contended that appellant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 31.01.2018.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for private- respondent opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court, however, admitted this fact that role of committing rape is not assigned to the appellant.
The appellant is not named in the F.I.R., which was lodged after consultation with the prosecutrix.
Without commenting on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the bail application filed before the court below deserves to allowed. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 14.05.2018 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Basti is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant - Bagish Kannojiya be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 I. Batabyal
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Bagish Kannojiya vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 January, 2019
Judges
  • Umesh Chandra Tripathi
Advocates
  • Surendra Nath Dubey Sachin Dubey Suresh Bahadur Singh