Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 316 of 2021 Appellant :- Jai Prakash Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi,Brijesh Kumar Tiwari,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Kshitij Tiwari,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan,Satish Kumar Mishra,Udai Shanker Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Girish Kumar Gupta,Mehendra Kumar Gautam
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed on record the notice served on learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Case called out. None present for the respondent no.2. Accordingly, the matter has been proceeded.
2. Heard Sri Udai Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ashwini Prakash Tripathi, 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 18.11.2020, passed by Special Judge/Ananya Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Varanasi, in Case Crime No. 434 of 2020, under Sections - 307, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V), 3(1)Dha S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Rohania, District - Varanasi, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 19.10.2020, the appellant is in confinement since 20.10.2020; 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, a petty dispute between the parties has been blown out of proportion. The alleged injured owed Rs. 18,500/- to the appellant. Only to resist repayment of money, false and fabricated case has been set up against the appellant. It has also been emphasized that the appellant's brother took the injured to the hospital and got him admitted and treated. Thus, the occurrence has been denied. 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 referred to the statement of the injured as also the injury report and prima facie discloses through and through firearm injury on the right side of the chest of the injured.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in face of the injury report and the statement of the injured which wholly corroborate the FIR allegations, no ground is made out to grant bail to the present application as the firearm injury is on the right side of the chest which is vital organ as may have caused loss of life.
7. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. However, it is expected that the learned court below shall make best efforts to conclude the trial, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from today.
Order Date :- 21.12.2021 Prakhar