Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 591 of 2021 Appellant :- Maharaj Singh @ Badelala Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 19.01.2021 passed by Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Jalaun at Orai in Bail Application No.05 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime no.524 of 2020, under Sections 406, 504, 506, 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Jalaun, District Jalaun.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on account of village parti-bandi and he has not committed any offence. The story of the prosecution has been said to be false and baseless. There is no independent support of witness confirming the participation of the appellant in the incident in question. General and vague allegations have been launched against the appellant. It has also been stressed upon that the appellant and the victim both are students in the same college and are indulged in consensus love affairs but this relationship was not accepted by the informant and he always made pressure upon the deceased and also humiliated her. The appellant has no criminal history. He further submits that in case, he is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding and misusing the liberty of bail. It has been assured on behalf of the appellant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required.
Also heard the learned Additional Government Advocate.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record as well as the order by which, bail application of the appellant-applicant 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 19.01.2021 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Maharaj Singh @ Badelala involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond 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.
However, this order will not prejudice the trial court while deciding the case on merit.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021 Raj