Allowed criminal appeal against bail rejection. Held that Special Judge erred in rejecting bail; set aside impugned order and directed release of appellant on conditions under SC/ST Act.
Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties each; conditions imposed to prevent tampering, intimidation, and reoffending.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:144892
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2218 of 2023
Appellant :- Mobeen Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurav Kumar Singh,Anand Pal Singh,Harish Chandra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Supplementary affidavit and the rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of appellant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellants with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 13.02.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kushinagar in Bail Application No. 260 of 2023 In S.T. No. 995 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 165 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC and Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Ramkola, District Kushinagar.
As per first information report, the case of prosecution is that on 10.06.2022 at about 7.00 am in the morning on some dispute relating to land the appellant and other accused persons have beaten with iron rod and lathi the cousin of informant Lorik, Sushila and Rajawati and abused them with caste related words.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The appellant is named in the first information report. Only general role has been assigned to the appellant and other accused persons. No specific role has been assigned to any of the accused. The appellant has not used any caste related words to the informant and others. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that there is no chance of the appellant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellant is languishing in jail since 13.02.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the
case.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the view that the appellant 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 the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.
Let appellant, Mobeen , involved in the above Case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
(v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 20.7.2023 Prajapati
Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail rejection order by the Special Judge under SC/ST Act is liable to be set aside.
Whether the appellant has made out a case for bail considering the nature of the offence and circumstances.
Mobeen
State of U.P.
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
