Allahabad High Court
Amit Bajpai vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 20 July, 2021
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 631 of 2021 Appellant :- Amit Bajpai Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Nadeem Murtaza,Jeet Bahadur,Praveen Kumar Yadav,Vaibhav Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
(Application No.59187 of 2021) The application seeks amendment in memo of criminal appeal.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as also learned counsel for the complainant, and perused the affidavit filed in support of the application for amendment in memo of criminal appeal.
Learned counsel for the applicant prays that he may be permitted to incorporate the amendment in the memo of appeal during the course of day.
The application is allowed.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to do necessary corrections in the memo of appeal during the course of day.
(Order in appeal) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as also learned counsel for the complainant, and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside order dated 10.3.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No.1497 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No.18 of 2021 under Sections 147, 308, 336, 427, 452, 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(dha), 3(1)(da) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Naka Hindola, District Lucknow whereby the bail application of the appellant for bail has been rejected.
As per the First Information Report, general allegation of assault has been made against the six accused persons including the applicant. In fact, the Manager of the Hotel Metro View in order to wreck vengeance upon the appellant for being the owner of rival hotel exaggerated the incident and gave it a colour of SC/ST offence. The dispute between the staff members of two hotels took place on 6.2.2021 where the applicant was not involved, however, in order to invoke the provisions of SC/ST Act the informant has lodged First Information Report on the behest of Manager of the Hotel Metro View. Even if it is taken as it is no offence under Section SC/ST is made out also there was no occasion for the appellant or any co-accused person to assault a security guard of another hotel without knowing as to which community he belongs to.
The applicant/appellant is in jail since 7.2.2021.
The applicant/appellant has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated.
It is submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. as well as the complainant's counsel opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant/applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon merit of the case, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record.
In view of above, the order dated 10.3.2021 (supra) passed by the court below is liable to be and is hereby set aside.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
Let the appellant/applicant involved in Case Crime No. 1497 of 2021 (supra) be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant 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.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 20.7.2021 Madhu