Criminal Appeal filed by Umakant Aheer challenging rejection of bail. Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order rejecting bail, and directed the release of the appellant on personal bond with sureties.
Bail granted to appellant Umakant Aheer on personal bond with two reliable sureties.
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. - 3004 of 2019
Appellant :- Umakant Aheer Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Kumar Nigam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
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 18.3.2019 passed in Bail Application No.547/2019 (Umakant Aheer vs. State) under section 452, 354Ka/376/511/323/504/506 I.P.C. & 3(1) Dha SC/ST Act, Akbarpur District Kanpur Dehat, pending in the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2/Spl.Judge SC/ST Act, Kanpur Dehat, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the alleged incident had taken place on 16.8.2018 and the First Information Report of the incident was lodged on the application moved under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 22.10.2018 after gap of about two months. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there was property dispute in between the present accused and the complainant. The deceased Uma Kanta was having inimical terms with the family of the complainant. He has further submitted that there was altercation between the present accused and the complainant family. He has further submitted that on the date of incident, police had reached to the place of the occurrence and arrested the complainant's husband and the
present accused and they were challanned under section 107 and 116 Cr.P.C. It has been submitted by counsel for the appellant that the appellant has tried to commit rape upon the victim complainant. There was dispute of money between the complainant's husband and the present accused appellant. It has been submitted by counsel for the appellant that when the accused went to the house of the complainant to get his money from the husband of the complainant, then this First Information Report was lodged against the present accused just to defame him. He has further submitted that the present accused appellant is in jail since 2.3.2019 having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the accused appellant has tried to commit rape upon the victim.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Without commenting on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the bail application filed before the court below deserves to be allowed. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 18.3.2019 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2/Spl.Judge SC/ST Act, Kanpur Dehat is hereby set aside.
Let the applicant-appellant Umakant Aheer 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 :- 17.5.2019 Rk
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal appeal against the rejection of bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act deserves to be allowed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Umakant Aheer
State Of U.P. And Anr.
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
