Criminal appeal against rejection of bail for accused charged under SC/ST Act and IPC. Supreme Court allowed appeal, quashed lower court order, and released appellants on bail with conditions of cooperation and sureties.
Impugned bail rejection order set aside; accused released on personal bond and two sureties each.
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. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2708 of 2020
Appellant :- Kallu And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Satya Prakash Rathor
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Khare, learned Counsel for the appellants-applicants, 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 appellants- Kallu and Pannu @ Panna Lal with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 02.07.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Mahoba in Bail Application No. 43 of 2020 in Case Crime No. 69 of 2020, under Sections 304, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(D), 3(1)(Gha) & 3(2)(5K) SC/ST Act, P.S.Mahobkanth, District- Mahoba.
As per the allegations made in the first information report, the informant along with his son was on motorbike and going to agricultural field and by 8.00 p.m. when he reached on a small puliya the named accused Ratiram, Kallu, Pannu and Nandan started physically assaulting the informant and his son also committed loot of Rs. 24,000/- from the informant and Rs. 20,000/- from Pappu.
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellantsapplicants that the appellants are quite innocent and has been falsely implicated for ulterior motives. It is also argued that applicants before this Court are innocent and having no criminal history to their credit. It is further argued that injury report clearly shows that the injured persons were under the influence of Alcohol and suffered injuries on account of that which also resulted in the death of the informant's son Pappu. The police conducted investigation and converted the offence under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC as the injured has also later on got back the money allegedly looted by the informant. Thus, the counsel of the applicants has further argued that it is on account of local village politics that the applicants' names have come to be implicated in the present case. However, in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The applicants are languishing in jail since 23.05.2020 and 05.06.2020.
Though the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant 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 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 02.07.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the above named accused-appellants involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicants 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 :- 21.1.2021 IrfanUddin
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail rejection order passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) should be set aside in the interest of justice.
Whether the appellants have made out a sufficient case for being released on bail subject to bond and sureties.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Kallu And Another
State of U.P. and Another
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
