Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4867 of 2021 Appellant :- Majahir @ Mujahid Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Akhilesh Kumar
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Vikas Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Akhilesh Kumar learned counsel for the opposite party No.2; Sri Janardan Prakash, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. 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 12.10.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Saharanpur, in Case Crime No. 273 of 2021, under Sections - 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) , S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Chilkana, District - Saharanpur, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 17.8.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 15.9.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; the criminal history of one case has been explained; chargesheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the FIR allegations are inherently improbable inasmuch as money is alleged to have been parted by the informant in many parts over a long period of time to secure a public employment; thus it has been submitted that in the first place the ingredients of the offence alleged are absent; in any case there is no evidence of such money having been paid over for the purpose as disclosed in the FIR; it has been submitted, even according to the FIR allegations, on an earlier occasion the employment secured by the appellant through the informant was found to be fake/bogus yet, the informant asserts that he continued to pay money to the appellant for other public employment; thus it has been submitted that the real dispute between the parties is monetary dispute arising from other relationship between them; merely because the informant wants the appellant to pay certain moneys to him, present prosecution has been lodged. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation under SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 12.10.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
8. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Majahir @ Mujahid, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on her 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 :- 17.12.2021 Faraz