Heard Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar, learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned AGA 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- Sumit Kumar @ Ajay Pratap with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 03.09.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/ Additional Session Judge, Kannauj in Bail Application No. 372 of 2020 in Case Crime No. 459 of 2019 under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, P.S.- Tirwa, District- Kannauj.
As per the allegations made in the first information report, the niece of the informant was missing from 10.08.2019 as she had gone to purchase vegetable outside her house. However, when her whereabouts could not be known, a missing report was lodged by the mother of the informant. It is thereafter, they came to know that the main accused Vijay Pratap had enticed her away and she was living in Delhi with Vijay Pratap. They visited Vijay Pratap's place to convince her to come back but she refused and now on 12.12.2019 her dead body was found and having got the information, they visited the mortuary on 13.12.2019 and recognized the dead body of the victim who was niece of the informant.
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated for ulterior motives. It is also argued that the applicant has no role in the entire incident as narrated in the first information report and he has come to be implicated only because of he being the real brother of main accused Vijay Pratap. It is further argued that the girl had married Vijay Pratap and was living happily with him. However, it is argued that present applicant has nothing to do with the family affairs of Vijay Pratap and there is no role assigned to him, inasmuch as, even remotely the applicant cannot be held connected with the incident at all. It is also argued that there is no criminal history to the credit of the applicant and submits, therefore, that his case is quite distinguishable from that of Vijay Pratap. It is also submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.12.2019.
Though the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the learned A.G.A. but he 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 29.05.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the above named accused-appellant 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 applicant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official is further directed to verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 11.1.2021 IrfanUddin