Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5875 of 2021 Appellant :- Faheem Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Om Narayan Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Om Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Vikas Goswami, 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 17.11.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Shahjahanpur, in Case Crime No.488 of 2021, under Sections -147, 148, 149, 325, 323, 308, 304, 504, 506, 352, 427 I.P.C.
and Section 3(2)5 of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station -Kant, District -Shahjahanpur, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
3. Though service is not ascertained, at the same time, it does appear that the co-accused (all named in the FIR) namely, Mukesh Kumar, Umesh Kumar, Vimal Kumar and Roopram, against whom exact similar allegations have been made, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.4450 of 2021, 4489 of 2021, 4486 of 2021 and 4515 of 2021 vide orders dated 09.12.2021, 09.12.2021, 09.12.2021 and 13.12.2021. For the reasons contained in those orders, the present appellant is also entitled to bail. Further, it has been submitted, the appellant has no criminal history.
4. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in awaiting report as to service.
5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.11.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Faheem, 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 S.Chaurasia