Criminal Appeal by Vivek @ Vikki against an order rejecting bail. The Court held that the appellant made out a case for bail despite prosecution allegations regarding kidnapping and abduction charges.
Impugned order dated 28.07.2021 rejecting bail set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bonds and two 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. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4295 of 2021
Appellant :- Vivek @ Vikki Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Daya Shankar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Learned A.G.A. claims that notice has been sufficiently served upon opposite party no. 2. Information about service of notice is on record. However, no one turns up on behalf of the informant, while the case was taken up in the revised list.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of SC/ST Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 28.07.2021, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) (Prevention of Atrocities Act), Jaunpur in Case Crime No. 165 of 2021, under Sections - 366, 120B I.P.C. & Section - 3(2)5A SC/ST Act, Police Station -Saraikhwaja, District - Azamgarh.
Contention raised on behalf of the appellant has been confined to the extent that without any fault of his own and as per the prosecution story, his role is confined to the ambit that the prosecutrix asked the appellant to give lift on his motor cycle and take her to the Bhandari Railway Station, Jaunpur. Except that, nothing concrete emerges against the appellant. The main accused in this case is Vimlesh Bind with whom, the prosecutrix was having some affair and the case of the appellant is entirely different from that of the aforesaid co-accusedVimlesh Bind. Nothing has been spelt by the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section - 164 Cr.P.C. against the appellant. In case, the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 12.07.2021.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
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 has been rejected, impugned
herein this appeal.
Nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the complainant/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 28.07.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant - Vivek @ Vikki involved in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
Order Date :- 21.10.2021 S Rawat
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail in the criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the bail application should be set aside.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Vivek @ Vikki
State of U.P.
Arvind Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
