Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 655 of 2019 Appellant :- Kasim Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Meraj Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
With Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 656 of 2019 Appellant :- Shahnawaz @ Shanu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Meraj Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A., for the State. Perused the record.
These two Criminal Appeals are being decided by a common judgment,. under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 have been challenging the orders dated 2.1.2019 passed by the IInd Additional Session Judge, Moradabad in Bail Application Nos.3788 of 2018 and 3789 of 2018 (Kasim Vs. State of U.P.) (Shahnawaz @ Shanu Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No.176 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the appellants were not named in the FIR and their name have come in the first time in the statement of Nanhu and Virendra Singh on 13.10.2018. He further submitted that the evidence against the appellants are extra judicial confession made before the Gaurav Bishnoi and Shailendra Kumar Sharma. He further submitted that the age of missing report of deceased and post mortem report of deceased are different, age of the deceased showing in the postmortem report of unknown person aged about 30 years where as missing report the age of 48 years no match with missing report of deceased body. He further submitted that there is no incriminating substance has been recovered from the possession of the present appellants. Lastly he submitted that both appellants are languishing in jail since 16.10.2018 and in case, they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and they will cooperate in the trial by all means.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that this Court is of the view that both appeals deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, both appeals are allowed and the aforementioned orders are hereby set aside.
Let the appellants Kasim and Shahnawaz alias Shanu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Mini