Criminal Appeal against bail rejection allowed. Special Judge erred in refusing release. Appellant Hari Mohan granted bail with bonds and conditions to cooperate in trial.
Bail granted with personal bonds and two sureties. Condition to cooperate in trial and not abscond.
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. - 833 of 2021
Appellant :- Hari Mohan Respondent :- State Of Up And Anotehr Counsel for Appellant :- Virendra Singh,Deo Anand Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dinesh Mishra,Prashant Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant 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 05.02.2021 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Special Judge (D.A.A. Act), Chitrakoot, in Case Crime No.870 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)Va SC/ST Act, P.S. Karwi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot.
Contention, in brief, is that the accusation is absolutely false. In this case, the appellant claims to have been falsely implicated on account of enmity and village party-bandi. There is no iota of evidence that may justify the involvement of appellant in the very commission of the offence. The criminal history of the appellant has been duly explained in the body of the bail application as well as in the supplementary affidavit. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant is languishing in jail since 05.02.2021.
Learned A.G.A. as well as counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and claimed that in this case there are number of injured persons, however, they could not dispute the fact that injuries are simple in nature.
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 05.02.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set-aside.
Let the accused-appellant, Hari Mohan 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 :- 27.8.2021 Vikas
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Appeal against the rejection of bail should be allowed.
Whether the appellant has made out a prima facie case sufficient to grant bail.
Whether the impugned order rejecting bail should be set aside.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Hari Mohan
State Of Up And Anotehr
Arvind Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
