Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3370 of 2021 Appellant :- Nakul Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Alok Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Despite service of notice on respondent no. 2, none has appeared on his behalf to oppose the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is being proceeded on merits.
2. Heard Sri Alok Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ankit Srivastav, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. 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 15.07.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Sant Kabir Nagar, in Case Crime No. 328 of 2021, under Sections - 307, 504 I.P.C.; Section 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station - Ghanghata, District - Sant Kabir Nagar, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 25.06.2021, the appellant is in confinement since then; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; the appellant has no criminal history; chargesheet has already been submitted yet, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted, a petty quarrel had erupted between the parties. The injuries were not caused by the appellant but by accidental occurrence while using fire crackers. Referring to the injury report, it has been submitted, there is reasonable doubt as to the occurrence. 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 & 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 15.07.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Nakul Yadav, 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 :- 17.12.2021 Abhilash