Supplementary affidavit has been filed, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Notice was sent to respondent no.2 and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned has submitted that the notice has been personally served on respondent no.2 but none is present for the respondent no.2.
This appeal has been filed by appellant Neetu @ Pravin Kumar against the impugned order dated 25.11.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Saharanpur passed in Bail Application No.4133 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 860 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 307, 504, 506, 354, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) 5 of SC/ST Act, P.S. Devband, District Saharanpur by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected. Aggrieved by the rejection order this appeal has been filed.
The FIR version is that the incident took place on 4.10.2019 and FIR was lodged on 5.10.2019 in midnight against the accused appellant and other accused persons with the allegation that the accused persons came with lathi-danda and abused the informant side by caste related words in order to humiliate them forcibly entered into there house and committed maarpeet with the informant, his wife and brothers Ravindra and Sushil. In the course of maarpeet, the appellant caused two stab injuries by knife and injured Ravindra who fell down and fainted. Thinking that Ravindra is dead, the accused persons left the place and gave threatening with dire consequences. Sushil also sustained serious injuries. The injured Ravindra was very serious and he was referred to the AIIMS, Rishikesh where he was under treatment.
Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that in the FIR there is general allegation of maarpeet and the accused appellant has been assigned the role of causing the stab injury. It has been further submitted that he is in jail from the last about 22 months, the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act has ignored the material facts and even if the injuries were not serious and only skin deep, he illegally rejected the bail application, which is liable to be set aside. Further submission is that there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that two stab injuries was caused to the injured Ravindra for which surgery of abdomen took place and he remained hospitalized for treatment and was discharged after five days and medicines were prescribed for further period of one month. Further submission is that by the stab injuries anterior and posterior stomach wall was injured from inside and outside for which surgery took place. Therefore, learned A.G.A. has submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order and the bail application has been rejected keeping in view the specific role assigned to the appellant of causing two stab injuries in the abdomen. He has also mentioned that there is criminal history of 11 cases against the appellants whereupon it has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the same has been adequately explained as all the cases the appellant have been released on bail.
Considered the submissions of both the sides. There appears to be specific allegation against the appellant that he caused two stab injuries on the abdomen of Ravindra by which he sustained injuries on anterior and posterior stomach for which he was hospitalized and surgery of the injury took place. Although, he was discharged after five days but medicines were prescribed. The abdomen is vital part of the body and knife is deadly weapon and injury was caused by the appellant on abdomen by using a deadly weapon knife. As such, considering the seriousness of the injuries and the weapon used, learned Special Judge has rejected the bail application. There appears to be no illegality in the impugned order. The offence has been committed against the members of scheduled caste community, therefore, I do not find any force in appeal and is liable to be dismissed.
The appeal is, accordingly dismissed.
It is however, directed that the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act shall undertake the trial on day today basis and to make all endevour to dispose of the case, in accordance with law within eight months unless there is any legal impediment.
Order Date :- 17.8.2021 Mini