Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5078 of 2021 Appellant :- Shahjad Ali Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,R.P. Yadav
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the informant. Taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not wish to file rejoinder affidavit thereto. Accordingly, the matter has been proceeded.
2. Heard Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R.P. Yadav, 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 appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 4.10.2021, passed by Exclusive Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Basti, in Special Sessions Trial No. 538 of 2021, Case Crime No. 23 of 2021, under Sections - 323, 376, 506, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r) (s), 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5a) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Paikoliya, District - Basti, whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 9.3.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 21.4.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation; the appellant has no criminal history; 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, learned counsel for the applicant submits, the FIR allegations are wholly false. Admittedly, the parties are adults and were in long standing relationship for more than 5 years. Merely on account of certain differences and disputes, present false prosecution has been lodged. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of 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 appellant.
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 appellant/s, cannot be sustained.
7. 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.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 4.10.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
9. Let the accused-appellant, namely, Shahjad Ali 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 the appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
Order Date :- 16.12.2021 Prakhar