The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of direct evidence and the absence of convincing material indicating tampering with evidence in considering bail applications under the relevant sections of the Acts.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Brij Mohan Sahai, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Sri Ashish Kumar Dubey, Advocate, for the appellant; Sri Ashish Raman Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as Sri Ashok Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

2. This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 10.12.2020 passed by learned Special Judge(S.C./S.T. Act)/Addl. Sessions Judge, Bahraich, in Bail Application No. 1827/12A/2020, Case Crime No. 170 of 2020, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Matera, District Bahraich, whereby the bail-application of the appellant has been rejected.

3. Sri B.M. Sahai, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the first-information-report dated 29.10.2020 had been lodged against unknown persons under Section 363 of I.P.C., stating that on the said date, i.e. on 29.10.2020, at about 7 a.m. the informant's son Ved Prakash Chaudhary, aged about 12 years, who was studying in Class-V, had gone to coaching, but he did not return home. Thereafter, the complainant searched the son, but he could not find his whereabouts and thereafter he lodged a missing report before the Police.

4. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the appellant Sri B.K. Sahai that after lodging of the first-information-report dead-body of the missing son of the complainant Ved Prakash Chaudhary was recovered. Thereafter the inquest-proceedings on his dead-body were conducted on 20.10.2020 on 8.05 hrs. The dead-body of the son of the complainant was found in a yellow bag on the instance of one informer, who is father of the first informant and who was also grandfather of the deceased, and at the time of inquest-proceedings one injury was found on the head of the deceased. Thereafter, the postmortem of the deceased was conducted on 31.10.2020 at 12:35 p.m. and as per the postmortem report the injuries are: one lacerated wound on the right side of temporal region; incised would on left side of temporal region and crush injuries were present on the forehead; contused swelling on the right side of the face and abrason mark was present in front of neck. As per postmortem report and the opinion of the Doctor, the cause of death is Asphyxia due to ante-mortem injury and the time of death is shown as one day prior. Thereafter the appellant was arrested on 1.11.2020. After recording the statement of the prosecution witnesses, the Investigating Officer filed the chargesheet against five persons, including the present appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive, whereas in fact he was not present on the spot. The first-information-report has been lodged against unknown persons. It has further been submitted that the name of the present appellant surfaced on the confessional statement of the main accused, namely Kaleem, and on the statement of the uncle of the deceased namely Mata Prasad and Pradeep, who were also the interested witnesses of the case. They have only stated that they have seen the appellant accompanying the deceased, but have not made statement that at the time of the alleged incident the appellant was present with the deceased or the appellant had committed the murder. It is also case of the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no independent witness, who had made the statement that the appellant had committed the alleged murder.

6. It was further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from possession or pointing of the appellant. Only one danda was shown to be recovered by the Police only with the intention to give gravity to the alleged offence, but that danda does not belong to the appellant. All the accused persons are said to have used danda and it is also the