Criminal Appeal against bail rejection. Court allowed appeal, set aside impugned order, and enlarged appellant on bail pending trial, considering nature of offence and lack of assigned role.
Impugned order dated 15.3.2019 set aside; appellant Mukesh Patel released on bail pending trial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2561 of 2019
Appellant :- Mukesh Patel Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shri Chandra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
None appears on behalf of the appellant despite service of notice upon respondent no.2.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14 A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 15.3.2019 passed by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Jhansi in Bail Application No.398/2019 (Mukesh Patel vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No.195 of 2018 under sections 307, 452, 504 I.P.C. and section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, PS. Tahrauli, District Jhansi, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the present accused appellant has not assigned any role in the incident and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village party-bandi and enmity. He next submitted that role of firing is attributed to co-accused Ramakant. As per doctor's opinion ,the injury sutained by the injured Puja was caused by firearm, which finds mention at page 39 of the paper book. He lastly submitted that the appellant, who is in jail since 20.2.2019 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and further has not disputed the fact that main role of firing has been assigned to co-accused Ramakant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 15.3.2019 passed by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Jhansi is hereby set aside.
Let the applicant-appellant Mukesh Patel be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. Order Date :- 6.5.2019 Rk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail pending trial in a case involving offences under Sections 307, 452, and 504 IPC in conjunction with Section 3(2)V of the SC/ST Act.
Whether the alleged false implication and attribution of firing to a co-accused warrants granting bail in the present circumstances.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh Patel
State Of U.P.
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
