Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1044 of 2021 Appellant :- Munna Kureshi @ Safi Ullah Azam Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pradeep Kumar Singh,Mohammad Khalid,Pradeep Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pawan Kumar Yadav,Satyaveer Singh
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Mohammad Khalid, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ashwin Prakash Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and; Sri Syed Abid Ali Naqvi, Advocate, holding brief of learned counsel for respondent no.2.
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 19.1.2021, passed by Additional Session Judge, Court no.2/Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Farrukhabad, in Case Crime No. 188 of 2019, under Sections - 323, 328, 376(2)D, 342 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Aocha, District - Mainpuri, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 24.11.2019, the appellant is in confinement since 1.10.2020; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; criminal history of ten cases has been explained. In this regard, it is submitted, mostly, they are police cases lodged on account of other disputes and reasons. In eight out of ten cases, the appellant is on bail and, in the other two cases, closure report have been submitted; charge-sheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, for the purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted, though general allegations were made in the FIR, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and also further statement recorded during investigation, the prosecutrix had made allegation of rape against co-accused Munesh and Saddam. She has not made any allegation of rape against the appellant. The prosecutrix clearly stated that the appellant had not participated in that occurrence. The case of the present appellant is found distinguished from that of co-accused Munesh and Saddam. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.
5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
6. 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.
7. Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts and 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.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 19.1.2021 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Munna Kureshi @ Safi Ullah Azam, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his 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 :- 21.12.2021 Prakhar