Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 693 of 2021 Appellant :- Neeraj Saini Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed supplementary affidavit, the same is taken on record.
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 02.12.2020 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bijnor arising out of case crime no.281 of 2020, under Sections 323, 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, P.S. Afgalgarh, District Bijnor.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on account of malafide intention and they have not committed any offence. The story of the prosecution has been said to be false and baseless. The appellant has solemnized intercaste love marriage with the deceased and he has never demanded any dowry. The informant and his family members were not happy with the marriage of the appellant and the deceased. Therefore, deceased was in depression for the last six months and committed suicide and at the time of incident, he was not present in the house. The appellant has no criminal history. He further submits that in case, he is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding and misusing the liberty of bail. It has been assured on behalf of the appellant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make available before the court whenever required. The appellant is languishing in jail since 05.11.2020.
Also heard the learned Additional Government Advocate.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record as well as 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 appellants have made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 02.12.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant are set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Neeraj Saini 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 appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
However, this order will not prejudice the trial court while deciding the case on merit.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021 Raj