Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5009 of 2021 Appellant :- Guddu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav,Atmaram Nadiwal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Though service report is awaited, upon query made, learned AGA states, written instructions has been received, amongst other, as to service effected on respondent no.2 on 29.10.2021, of the present bail application. None has appeared on his behalf. Accordingly the matter has been proceeded on merits.
2. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Janardhan Prakash learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. 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 22.9.2021, passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Court no.2, Maharajganj, in Case Crime No. 144 of 2020, under Sections - 323, 504 and 306 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Thuthibari, District - Maharajganj, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 25.9.2020, the appellant is in confinement since 28.9.2020; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; the appellant has no criminal history; charge-sheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, for the purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted, no such occurrence took place. No specific role assignment has been made. Further, it has been submitted, case diary does not contain any injury report or statement of the doctor. On this last aspect, time was granted to learned AGA to obtain instructions. Nothing further has emerged today. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.
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/s, cannot be sustained.
7. Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts and submissions and having regard to the status of the evidence, as has been shown to exist on record, let the appellant/s be enlarged on bail at this stage.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 22.9.2021 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Guddu 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 :- 21.12.2021 Prakhar