Abhishek Yadav @ Monu v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9007 of 2023 Appellant :- Abhishek Yadav @ Monu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pranjal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. List revised. Learned A.G.A. submits that notice upon the informant has been duly served but no one appears on his behalf. This criminal appeal has been filed alongwith delay condonation application. However, office has reported that delay condonation application is not required. 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 appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 17.04.2023 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Ghazipur in Bail Application No.1661 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 26 of 2023, under Sections 147, 304, 323 and 504 IPC & Sections 3 (1) (da), 3 (1) (dha) [ Section 3

(1) (r) and 3 (1) (s)], 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Kasimabad, District Ghazipur. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that in the first information report as well as in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no allegation has been made against the appellant that he addressed the informant with caste related words. During investigation when additional statement of the informant was recorded he made such type of allegations against the appellant. It is further submitted that so far as wooden stick shown to be recovered on the pointing out of the appellant is concerned, the same is planted as there is no public witness of such recovery. It is further submitted that co-accused Balwant Kumar who was not named in the F.I.R. has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19609 of 2023. Apart from it co-accused Raj Kishore and Virat Kumar @ Appu have already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 29.05.2023 and 02.06.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 21655 of 2023 and 20163 of 2023 respectively. 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

14.02.2023 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 the appellant, namely, Abhishek Yadav @ Monu 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 he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is 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 :- 17.10.2023/AKT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad