Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4248 of 2019 Appellant :- Ikrar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohd. Iqbal Farooqui,Indra Mohan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar Yadav,Mahesh Prasad Yadav
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Rejoinder and supplementary affidavits filed today are taken on record.
Sri Dinesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate has made a statement at the Bar that the vakalatnama has wrongly been filed in the present case. Infact the said vakalatnama relates to Criminal Appeal No. 2018 of 2019 and, therefore, the same may be returned back to him for filing it in the correct criminal appeal.
Office to return the vakalatnama to the counsel for opposite party no. 2 as per Rules.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 27.5.2019 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/ Addl. Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in Bail Application No. 3489 of 2019 (Ikrar Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 132 of 2019, under Sections 376, 323, 506, 307, 326-A IPC and 3(2) (5) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bhojpur, District- Ghaziabad, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
As per the allegation made in the first information report, it is alleged that the appellant is not named in the first information report. During the course of investigation, the statement of victim Soni has been recorded and in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it is alleged that the appellant had forcibly taken away the victim in a sugarcane field near brick kilns, where Zulfiqar committed rape upon her while the appellant was standing there. Thereafter the appellant is said to have assaulted the victim and poured some chemical in her ear. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also the said statement has been reiterated.
Learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and has pointed out that in the present case statements of some witnesses has also been recorded.
After considering the submissions made at bar by learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the record, this Court is of the view that when the trial is already in progress, it shall not be proper to give any finding or pass any order on the merits of the case on the basis of the statements given in the Court.
The trial is already in progress and the accused should get the final verdict with regard to his innocence and guilt from the Trial Court on the basis of appreciation of evidence produced during the course of trial. Analyzing the testimonies and worthiness of the witnesses and making the judicial assessment of the same can be more appropriately done by the Trial Court.
Any finding or order passed by this Court on the merits of the case after assessing the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses produced during the course of trial might seriously prejudice the independent assessment of the evidence by the trial court, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that any observation made by this Court may cause prejudice to either side.
On the basis of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration that the appellant has been assigned the role of pouring acid upon the victim, who has suffered serious injuries, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
The appeal is also accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 KU