Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 5.12.2020, passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Allahabad, rejecting the Bail Application No.4888 of 2020, CNR No. UPAD01008888, Shyam Kumar Shukla versus State of U.P., pertaining to Case Crime No.25 of 2020, under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)V S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Naini, District - Allahabad.
Contention raised on behalf of the appellant has been confined to the extent that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of blind murder and no one saw the occurrence in question. In fact, it so happened that prior to the incident on 09.01.2020, some altercation/dispute was falsely raised by the informant side and on account of that frustration, the F.I.R. has been lodged that merely, because of the aforesaid dispute on 09.01.2020, the appellant has committed murder of the father of the informant, who was found lying on the construction site of the house. In the wake of the aforesaid description in the F.I.R. obviously there is no recovery made from the appellant. In case, the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 22.1.2020.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has though opposed the bail of the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
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 5.12.2020, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Shyam Kumar Shukla 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 :- 22.2.2021 S Rawat