Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3603 of 2021 Appellant :- Bhagwat Saini Respondent :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of SC/ST Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 19.03.2021 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, Bulandshahar in Case Crime No.14 of 2021 under Sections 272, 273, 304, 326, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 I.P.C. and Section 60(a) Excise Act and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST (P.A.) Act, P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahar.
Contention, in brief, is that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no nexus with commission of the offence in question. The only allegation against the appellant is confessional statement of the co- accused who were caught by the police and they in order to escape their liability dragged the present appellant against whom, nothing has been recovered by the police. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant is languishing in jail since 10.01.2021. Under the similar set of facts co- accused Vinod has already been admitted to bail by this Court on 9.9.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.2043 of 2021, Vinod Vs. State of U.P. and another, copy whereof has been produced by the appellant, the same is taken on record.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant 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 appellant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 19.03.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant- Bhagwat Saini involved in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences 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.
It is made clear that advantage of this bail order shall not go to named co- accused in the F.I.R. Kuldeep, Mukesh and Yadram.
Order Date :- 25.10.2021 Raj