Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5262 of 2021 Appellant :- Saurabh @ Sheru Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey,Manoj Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ram Raj Pandey
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and; Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
2. 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 appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 23.9.2021, passed by Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Baghpat, in Case Crime No. 78 of 2020, under Sections - 452, 504, 302, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Chhaprauli, District - Baghpat, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 11.3.2020, the appellant is in confinement since 24.3.2020; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation; criminal history of the appellant has been explained; charge-sheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, for the purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted, the prosecution story was supported up to the stage of investigation. At the trial, three witnesses have been examined. The first informant as also injured have turned hostile. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
5. 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 appellant/s, cannot be sustained.
6. Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts and submissions and having regard to the status of the evidence, as has been shown to exist on record, let the appellant/s be enlarged on bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 23.9.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
8. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Saurabh @ Sheru, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Prakhar