Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5517 of 2021 Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Gautam,Deepak Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Though service report is awaited, upon query made Sri Janardan Prakash learned A.G.A. States that service of the present bail appeal has been effected on opposite party No. 2 on 20.11.2021. None has appeared on behalf of opposite party No. 2 to oppose the bail appeal. Accordingly the bail appeal has been proceeded on merits.
2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Janardan Prakash, 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 25.10.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Hathras, in Case Crime No. 175 of 2021, under Sections -
304 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Hasayan, District - Hathras, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 14.8.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 24.8.2021; 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, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that a purely accidental occurrence has been given false prosecution narration for collateral purpose. 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 25.10.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Pramod Kumar, 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 :- 20.12.2021 Faraz