Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2778 of 2020 Appellant :- Gajendra Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurav Kakkar,Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Om Prakash Yadav
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the State is taken on record.
Heard Sri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondents.
This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 29th September, 2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Jhansi in Bail Application No.- 1435 of 2020 rejecting the bail application arising out of Case Crime No.- 349 of 2020 under Sections 147, 302 I.P.C. and Sections 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station- Mauranipur, District- Jhansi.
As per the allegations in the first information report, the applicant is one of the accused persons with whom the deceased had accompanied in the afternoon of 13th August, 2020 and thereafter never returned. His body was found on 14th August, 2020 in an injured condition and was taken to the hospital, where he had been declared dead. It is on the basis of the fact that these accused persons with whom the deceased had accompanied, they all have come to be named in the first information report.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that no specific role has been assigned to anyone and as per the version of the first information report, the role is assigned to everyone in the same manner that it is the named accused persons with whom the deceased was last seen. It is also argued that there is no other evidence except the statement of the informant and other family members of the informant. It is also argued that co- accused persons, namely, Mahesh and Navla, named in the first information report having identical role, have already been enlarged on bail vide order 4th January, 2021 and 10th December, 2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.- 40141 of 2020 and 39136 of 2020 respectively.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has though opposed the bail of the appellants but could not dispute the above fact and the fact that there is no specific role assigned to the appellant and allegations regarding involvement of the accused persons and commission of crime is general in nature.
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-applicant 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 29th September, 2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Gajendra involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official is further directed to verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Atmesh