Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Khare, learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant, Sri Nand Lal Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA 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- Raj Kumar Yadav @ Munna with the prayer to set aside the order dated 12.8.2020 passed by Additional Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mau in Bail Application No. 1125 of 2020 rejecting the bail application in Case Crime No. 108 of 2020 under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, P.S.- Chiraiyakot District- Mau.
Allegations in the first information report are that the deadbody of the deceased was found and from the condition of the body it reflected that victim was done to death by using some sharp edged weapon. During investigation the name of the applicant has come to be implicated in the commission of the crime on the basis of the statement recorded by the police of one Rajesh Gupta who used to run a hocker's shop (thela) in front of the liquor shop and he in his statement has stated that the present applicant and the deceased used to fight with each other quite often because of their illicit relationship with one woman who is wife of one Bala Yadav.
Post mortem report of the deceased shows several ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased that led to his death. Viscera is preserved and sent for chemical examination.
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated for ulterior motives. It is further submitted that except the statement of Rajesh Gupta, there is no direct evidence to implicate the applicant in the present criminal case. It is also argued that there is no criminal history of the applicant in the past. It is also submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.6.2020.
Per contra, the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the counsel for the complainant as well as the learned A.G.A. on the ground that there are certain circumstantial evidence to refuse exercise of discretion and grant bail. However, they agreed that except for the statement of Rajesh Gupta, there is no direct evidence reflecting involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime. They also cannot dispute the fact that the applicant is having no criminal history.
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 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 12.8.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the above named accused-appellant 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.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official is further directed to verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 7.1.2021 Deepika