Heard Sri Navnath Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Mandvi Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent.
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 with the prayer to set aside the order dated 08.06.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Muzaffarnagar rejecting the bail application no. 1105 of 2020 arising out of case crime no. 0017 of 2020, under Section 147,148,149,307,323,504,506 and 325 IPC and 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali City, District- Muzaffarnagar.
As per allegations made in the first information report it is around 3.13 pm of 09.01.2020 when the informant's cousin Rajveer visited his agricultural field to collect the fodder for cattle that the assailants including appellants named in the first information report started physically assaulting him with lathi and danda and while the informant was going to lodge the first information report to the police that present appellant fired shot from his barrel gun which hit the palm of the injured Deepanshu and he was rushed to a Government hospital where he was advised X-ray.
It is argued on behalf of the appellant that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case as this is a case of mutual scuffle that took place between both sides and both sides have suffered injuries. It has been further stated that in the statement of injured Rajbeer and Deepanshu, no specific role has been assigned to any one of the accused persons. He further submits that the Government hospital does not show any injuries of the Deepanshu to be caused by firearms, however, X-ray showed that some shadow was detected in bone deep area but there is no report regarding removal of the pellets from the palm. It is further submitted that the version of the statement of the injured Deepanshu recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C is different from version of the first information report. He further submits that there is two cases criminal history to the credit of the appellant and vide paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, the appellant has explained his criminal history in which he has already been bailed out. It is further submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The appellant is in jail since 19.03.2020.
Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the complainant have though opposed the bail of the appellant, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact and the facat that the lacerated wound caused on palm of the infjrued amounted to firearm injury and there is fracture but they could not dispute that the palm is not vital part of the body and in so far as injuries caused by the appellant before this Court is concerned, those injuries have not been disputed.
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.
Nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the complainant/ State so as to justify and sustain the order passed by the court below rejecting the bail application of the appellant.
Thus, in view of the above 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 08.06.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Ravi @ Vijay involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their 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 :- 2.2.2021 Sanjeev