Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 638 of 2019 Appellant :- Mahesh Singh And 3 Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Swapnil Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants-applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed challenging the cognizance order dated 22.10.2018 passed by Learned II- Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Basti in Special Sessions Trial No. 84 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 7 of 2018, under Sections 504, 506 of I.P.C., and Section 3(1) (r) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Nagar, District-Basti whereby appellants have been summoned in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellants contented that Sri Deena Nath Singh is father of appellant Nos. 3 and 4. Appellant Nos. 3 and 4 have filed civil suit against Kedar, father of Respondent No.2 in which stay order was passed in favour of Deena Nath Singh. After that Raju has lodged FIR maliciously with false allegation. From the content of FIR no offence is made out.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants.
Accordingly, I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court and as such, this appeal stands dismissed.
However, none of the aforesaid offences against appellants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
Accordingly, in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and in view of the order passed by this Court in Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State, and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190, it is directed that in case the appellants file their bail application and also pray for interim bail, their prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day, and the regular bail shall be decided thereafter by affording an opportunity of hearing to the victim or his dependent as per the mandate of Section 15A (5) S.C./S.T. Act.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the appellants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 Manish Tripathi