Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2521 of 2019 Appellant :- Mohd. Arshad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Om Prakash,Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, Sri Jagdish Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 18.02.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), District Varanasi in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.643 of 2019 (Mohd. Arshad Vs. State of U.P.) in Case Crime No.744 of 2018, under Sections 376-D, 323, 328, 34 I.P.C. and u/s 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submitted that appellant is not named in the first information report. He submitted that in the first information report it has been alleged that the victim was beaten and rape was committed on her by other persons. He submitted that the victim has not received any injury on her person. He further submitted that the name of the present appellant has cropped up in the statement of the victim, recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. He further submitted that the co- accused, Mohd. Ayan, whose name was also came in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Appeal No.6497 of 2018, vide order dated 25.02.2019. He further submitted that the victim is a married lady, aged about 35 years. Learned counsel for the appellant claims parity with the co-accused as stated above. The appellant is in jail since 27.07.2018 with no previous criminal history to his credit.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the aforementioned order is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant Mohd. Arshad 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 :- 29.4.2019 R./