Appeal under Section 14-A(2) SC/ST Act against rejection of bail in a murder and caste-atrocity case. Considering FIR contents, post-mortem report and appellant's specific role in taking and crushing the deceased with a tractor, the High Court found no illegality in the bail rejection and dismissed the appeal.
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. - 82
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1660 of 2024
Appellant :- Sumit Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Kumar Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shiv Mangal Pandey,Yadvendra Mani Mishra
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Counter-affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. as well as rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the appellant today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State.
This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST P.A. Act), Firozabad in Case Crime No.482 of 2023, under Sections 302, 364, 201 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Narakhi, District Firozabad.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that in this case appellant was innocent and has committed no offence. There is no any evidence to show that appellant committed murder of the deceased except the allegation that he took the deceased with him from his house. Further submitted that F.I.R. was lodged on third day of the alleged incident. Learned Special Judge did not consider all these facts while considering bail application but rejected it on 13.02.2024. There is no any motive to commit murder of the deceased. Entire allegations levelled in the F.I.R. and in the statement are false. The learned trial court while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Learned counsel for the appellant also referred to the amended provisions of SC/ST Act. Appellant is in jail since 24.10.2023 having no criminal antecedent. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.
Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the deceased was taken from his house by the appellant himself and he himself was driving the tractor by which the deceased was trampled and his dead body was concealed in the same field. When query was made by father of the deceased he did not tell about the incident but threatened the informant/father. In this way, the learned Special Judge rejected the bail of the appellant after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case which cannot be said unlawful.
I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the contents in F.I.R., the post-mortem report and the fact that appellant has been assigned specific role of taking the deceased from his house as well as causing injuries on the person of the deceased by crushing him with tractor, there appears no illegality in the order passed by the learned Special Judge which warrants no interference by this Court but this appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the appeal is, hereby, dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.8.2024 Ashok Gupta
Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Special Judge's order rejecting bail under the SC/ST Act suffered from illegality warranting interference.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Sumit Kumar
State of U.P.
Shiv Mangal Pandey
Subhash Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
