The High Court allowed the criminal appeal against a bail rejection order. It set aside the lower court's decision, finding the impugned order suffered from infirmity and illegality, and ordered the release of the appellant on bail.
Impugned order set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond and sureties, subject to conditions.
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. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1676 of 2018
Appellant :- Phool Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Babu Lal Ram,Arvind Kumar Dixit,Chandra Dutt,Gaurav Pandey,Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1 of 2018
This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment order dated 24.01.2018 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST) Kanpur Nagar in Bail Application No.3344 of 2017 (Phool Singh Vs. State of U.P. & another) arising out of Case Crime No.99 of 2017, under Section 304 I.P.C, and Section 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Narwal, District Kanpur Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant; learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned AGA and perused the entire record.
According to FIR version, the appellant-applicant, co-accused and deceased consumed Alcohal; thereafter some villagers found the deceased while drowning in pond. They took him to the hospital but before reaching the hospital, he died. He further submitted that the appellant-applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no motive assigned for commission of the alleged offence. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submitted that co-accused Shailendra Kumar @ Putan has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.09.2020 in Criminal Appeal No.1966 of 2020. The case of the appellant-applicant is also similar to co-accused Shailendra Kumar @ Putan. The appellant-applicant has no criminal history, he is in jail since 11.08.2017 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant-applicant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.
On the other hand, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have opposed the bail prayer of the appellant-applicant but learned AGA has not made any objection regarding the role of the co-accused.
I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant-applicant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and finally disposed of, the impugned order dated 24.01.2018 rejecting the bail application of the appellant-applicant is set-aside.
Let the appellant-applicant Phool Singh , involved in Case Crime No.Case Crime No.99 of 2017, under Section 304 I.P.C, and Section 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Narwal, District Kanpur Nagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions;
It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.
Needless to note that observation, if any, has come in this order, that is only for the purpose of deciding this appeal and learned Trial Judge will not be influenced in any manner while deciding the trial.
Order Date :- 22.10.2020 SKD
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order rejecting bail suffered from infirmity and illegality warranting interference.
Whether to grant bail to the appellant charged under the SC/ST Act and IPC.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Phool Singh
State of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
