The High Court upheld the Special Judge's order rejecting the appellant's bail application under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, directing the lower court to expedite the trial within one year.
Bail application by the appellant is rejected; the trial against the appellant is directed to be concluded within one year.
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. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9381 of 2022
Appellant :- Hasim Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shamsuddin Ahmad,Yash Raj Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dinkar Lal
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant;Shri Swayamanand Sisodiya,holding brief of Shri Dinkar Lal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant, Hasim to set aside the impugned order dated 21.11.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST(P.A.) Act, has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 625 of 2022, under Sections 323,366,376,427,504,506 IPC and Section 3(2) (5) SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahr.
There is allegation against the appellant of abduction of minor girl and rape.Thereafter First Information Report was lodged under sections 323,366,376,427,504,506 IPC apart implication under Section 3(2) (5) SC/ST (P.A.) Act. From the First Information Report and the statements of victim under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.,there are consistent allegations against the appellant.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
This Court after hearing the learned counsels for the parties does not finds any ground for enlarging the appellant on bail.
The bail application is accordingly rejected.
The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the appellant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 17.4.2023 Atul kr. sri.
Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the appellant challenging the rejection of his bail application.
Whether the court below's order rejecting bail should be set aside.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Hasim
State of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
