Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3033 of 2021 Appellant :- Nanhe Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Nagendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sanjiv Kumar Gupta,Sanjive Kumar Gupta
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 08.07.2021 passed by Additional District Judge and Sessions Judge/Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Budaun in Bail Application No.1432 of 2021, under Sections 304, 326 IPC and Section 3(2)V SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Wazirganj, District Budaun.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further added that the F.I.R. is highly concocted and based on conjuncture and surmise. The informant was not present on the spot. So far as the story drafted in the first information report is concerned, the same does not match with the statement of none other than the victim Sriram and he has not assigned any role of causing any burn injury to the appellant. The appellant has no motive to commit the offence in question. It is further submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The appellant is languishing in jail since 03.06.2021.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has though opposed the bail of the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant-applicant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal.
Nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the complainant/ State so as to justify and sustain the order passed by the court below rejecting the bail application of the appellant.
Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence, complicity of accused, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 08.07.2021 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Nanhe involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
Order Date :- 25.10.2021 Raj