Criminal Appeal challenging the refusal of bail. The Court found the case to be fit for bail without expressing an opinion on merits, allowing the appeal and quashing the impugned order.
Appellant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties of like amount.
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. - 755 of 2019
Appellant :- Imran @ Bhoora Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Rai,Sanjay Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ganesh Prasad
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 12.12.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-IInd/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bijnor in Bail Application No.2498 of 2018(State Vs. Suleman and others), arising out of Case crime No. 592 of 2018, under Sections 307, 332, 353, 120B I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Najibabad, District Bijnor seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village party bandi and enmity. He further submitted that the FIR has been lodged against unknown persons and the present appellant has not named in the FIR. He further submitted that the injured has given statement after viewing the C.C.T.V. camera of the incident, copy whereof has been annexed on page 8 of the supplementary affidavit, wherein injured saw some photographs of co-accused Suleman then he said that Suleman has assaulted him. He further submitted that the main role of assault has been assigned to co-accused Suleman and no weapon of assault has been recovered from the present accused. Lastly he submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 1.10.2018 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the appellant.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the aforementioned order is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant Imran @ Bhoora be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 1.5.2019 Mini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant charged under Sections 307,332,353 IPC and SC/ST Act is eligible for bail at this stage of the trial.
Whether the alleged lack of specific incriminating evidence and false implication justify granting bail in the appeal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Imran @ Bhoora
State Of U.P.
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
