Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5543 of 2021 Appellant :- Kallu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sarvajeet Singh 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 have been received by him, amongst others, as to service effected on respondent no.2 on 28.10.2021. None has appeared on his/her behalf. Accordingly, the matter has been proceeded on merits.
2. Heard Sri Sarvajeet Singh, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Vikas Goswami, 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 03.09.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Budaun, in Case Crime No. 01 of 2021, under Sections - 323, 325, 307 and 504 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(Va) and 3(2)(v) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Wajeerganj, District - Budaun, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 01.01.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 09.08.2021; 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; chargesheet has already been submitted yet, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted, though the FIR allegations are vague and general, the eye-witness Bunty Jatav had assigned role to the applicant of causing injury to a buffalo. There are no incised wound suffered by any injured person. 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, 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 03.09.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Kallu, 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 :- 23.12.2021 Abhilash