Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 313 of 2019 Appellant :- Ram Karan Yadav @ Raj Karan Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sharad Saran Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
This criminal appeal under Section 14A (1) of The Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'Act, 1989') has been filed on behalf of the appellants challenging the charge-sheet dated 25.2018 and congnizance order dated 10.7.2018 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2 (S.C./S.T. Act), Kaushambi, in Case Crime No.176 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 325, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2) (v) and 3(1) (dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Saini, District-Kaushambi, whereby the appellant has been summoned under the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that no offence is made out against the appellant and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned trial court.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellant.
Accordingly, I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court and as such, this appeal stands dismissed.
However, none of the aforesaid offences against appellant is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. The police has submitted charge-sheet. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
Accordingly, in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and in view of the order passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Sakeena and another v. State and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190, it is directed that in case the appellant files his bail application and also prays for interim bail, his prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day and the regular bail shall be decided thereafter by affording an opportunity of hearing to the victim or his/her dependent as per the mandate of Section 15A (5) of Act, 1989.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the appellant surrenders and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 LN Tripathi
Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 313 of 2019 Appellant :- Ram Karan Yadav @ Raj Karan Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sharad Saran Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
In Re: Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application Heard learned counsel for the appellants on delay condonation application.
This delay condonation application has been filed on behalf of the appellants with a prayer to condone the delay in filing the appeal, which is reported to be beyond time by 176 days.
For the reasons stated in the affidavit appended to the delay condonation application, the appellants could not file the appeal in time.
Cause shown is sufficient. The prayer so made is accepted and accordingly, the delay condonation application stands allowed. The delay is condoned and the appeal is treated to have been filed well within time.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 LN Tripathi