Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2703 of 2021 Appellant :- Kallu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ambrish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of S.C./S.T. Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 14.04.2021, passed by Special Judge, D.A.A. Act / Special Judge S.C./S.T (P.A.) Act, Chitrakoot, in Case Crime No. 199 of 2019, under Sections - 302, 201 I.P.C. and Section - 3(2) 5 S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Police Station - Mau, District - Chitrakoot.
Crux contention raised before this Court is that it is a circumstantial based case. The incident relates to 27.10.2019. The missing report was lodged without naming any person on 29.10.2019. Thereafter, on 31.10.2019 the dead body was recovered and on the same day F.I.R. was lodged, wherein four persons were named including the appellant. Except the last seen evidence, there is no other link evidence against the appellant to connect him with the alleged offence. Similarly circumstanced other co-accused- Shyam Kishore Dhuriya and Uma Shankar Dhuriya against whom last seen evidence is imputed have already been admitted to bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Copy of their bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No.9 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 16.11.2019.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
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 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 14.04.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant - Kallu involved in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences 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 :- 29.10.2021 S Rawat