Heard learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 9.2.2021 passed by learned Secod Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Shrawasti in Bail Application No.46/2021 arising out of Case Crime No.405/2020, under Sections 147, 148, 332, 353, 333, 323, 504, 427, 186 I.P.C. & Section 3 (2) (5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Kotwali Bhinga, District- Shrawasti.
Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid crime. Learned counsel further submitted that general role assigned to the appellant of inflicted injury to the Forest Official. The nature of injury was opined simple and caused by Shiv Prasad by blunt and hard object. He further submitted that the main role attributed to Mangal and Rajesh alias Mammad, who were granted bail by the Sessions Court. There is no eye witness account in the case. It is also submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the appellant. Although several criminal history attributed to the appellant but all the criminal history explained by the appellant through affidavit in paras 25, 26 and 27. The appellant is in jail since 18.12.2020. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order, hence the applicant is not entitled for bail and the bail application is liable to be rejected.
After hearing the rival submissions of the parties, and perused the record, without expressing any opinion on merits, I fine that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant/applicant.
Impugned order dated 9.2.2021 is hereby set aside.
The appeal is hereby allowed.
Let appellant- Saleem @ Kuddu be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 sks