Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5873 of 2021 Appellant :- Ramveer Singh Yadav And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Sanjeev Kumar 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 09.12.2021. 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 Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants; 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 appellants with the prayer to set aside the order dated 30.11.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Mainpuri, in Case Crime No. 299 of 2021, under Sections - 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5Ka S.C./S.T.
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Aunchha, District - Mainpuri, whereby bail application of the appellants have been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellants submits, against the FIR lodged on 11.11.2021, the appellants are in confinement since then; the appellants claim to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case they are not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; the appellants have 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 owing to other disputes and differences between the parties, only vague and general allegations have been made in the FIR; these are not corroborated by any independent witnesses or injury report; all injuries are reported to be simple in nature. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation under 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 appellants.
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 appellants, 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 appellants be enlarged on bail at this stage.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 30.11.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellants is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellants, namely, Ramveer Sing Yadav and Shahveer Singh Yadav, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that appellants shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Faraz