Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5350 of 2021 Appellant :- Bhupendra Pandey Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Prasad Tiwari,Smt Alpana Tiwari,Vinay Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar Agarwal
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Rajednra Prasad Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for the opposite party No.2; Sri Ashwanti 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 15.11.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad, in Case Crime No. 150 of 2021, under Sections - 376D, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Daraganj, 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 21.6.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 24.10.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; criminal history of the appellant has been explained; 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 by learned counsel for the appellant that a cock and bull story has been set up by the prosecution which has no basis; neither there is any recording of CCTV camera to corroborate the occurrence nor it is in any case plausible that the victim who is completely illiterate would have remembered the registration number of the vehicle that too on the basis of information given by an unknown person; that unknown person is claimed to have found the victim lying on the roadside after being dropped by her assailants who had left with the vehicle by the time. 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, 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 15.11.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
8. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Bhupendra Pandey, 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.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Faraz