Appeal against bail rejection in an SC/ST atrocity case was allowed. The High Court set aside the trial court's order and granted bail to the appellant, directing release and verification of the order.
Bail granted to the appellant Niraj Kumar upon a personal bond and two sureties; impugned bail rejection order set aside.
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. - 6113 of 2019
Appellant :- Niraj Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Satya Priya Mishra,Jitendra Kumar,Manvendra Singh,Vikas Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Babu Lal Ram
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the parties 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 appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 28th August, 2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Fatehpur in Bail Application No.- 1338 of 2019 (State vs. Niraj Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No.- 167 of 2018 under Sections 452, 354, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1) r, 3(1) s, 3(2)(5-a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station- Jafarganj, District- Fatehpur.
As per the allegations made in the first information report it was in the night of 19th September, 2018 while the daughter of the informant was sleeping on the roof that suddenly accused applicant approached to her bed and thus his daughter got awakened and screamed and then applicant put his hand upon her mouth and threatened her pointing the knife. However, hearing the noise of daughter of the informant initially made by her, the younger son of the informant also started shouting upon which the applicant ran away.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is on account of some dispute relating to business deal between the two parties that the present first information report has been lodged and the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and his name though has also come in the statement of the independent witnesses, namely, Vijay Pal and Rejesh Kumar recorded by the police but the version of the first information report and the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. varies as the girl gave statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. under the pressure of her parents so that the applicant may be implicated further in the present case. It is also stated that there
is no criminal history to the credit of the applicant. It is further submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The appellant is languishing in jail since 28th August, 2019.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has though opposed the bail of the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
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 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 28th August, 2019 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the accused-appellant, namely, Niraj Kumar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicant 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 :- 28.1.2021 Atmesh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to set aside the Additional Sessions Judge's order rejecting bail in a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Whether the appellant has made out a case for bail given the circumstances of the crime and the appellant's background.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Niraj Kumar
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
