Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 17 of 2021 Appellant :- Sonu @ Savez Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shams Uz Zaman Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anurag Yadav,Mahendra Pratap
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
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 26.11.2020 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge Special SC/ST Act, Baghpat in case crime no.794 of 2020, under Sections 376, 323, 506 IPC and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Badaut, district Baghpat.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity and he has not committed any offence. The story of the prosecution has been said to be false and baseless. He added that the relationship infact existed on consensus basis and a consensual existed whereby both entered into relationship and to to say that any rape was committed is absolutely false. No promise was ever extended for marriage. The victim is major. He further submits that in case, he is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding and misusing the liberty of bail. It has been assured on behalf of the appellant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make available before the court whenever required. The appellant is languishing in jail since 27.09.2020. The appellant has no criminal history.
Also heard the learned Additional Government Advocate and learned counsel for the informant.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record as well as 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 appellants have made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 26.11.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Sonu @ Savez involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond 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.
However, this order will not prejudice the trial court while deciding the case on merit.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021 Raj