Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 627 of 2019 Appellant :- Mohd. Hadis And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Om Prakash, learned A.G.A., for the State. Perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (1) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 25.10.2018 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Siddharth Nagar, in Complaint Case No. 19 of 2016 (Shivkumar Vs. Mohd. Hadish and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 of I.P.C., and Section 3 (1) (10) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Uskabazar, District-Siddharth Nagar whereby appellants have been summoned in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellants contended that from perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the appellants. He further contended that there is civil suit pending between the parties. This complaint has been filed maliciously with false allegation to harass the appellants. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellants contended that the complainant is not member of Scheduled Caste.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity 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.
Defence of the accused/appellants cannot be considered by the trial court at the time of cognizance.
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 Jaswant