IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
Sunita Yadav, J.
Balram – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 4727 of 2023
Decided On : 06-04-2023
Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act - Bail Application - The court allowed the appeal and directed the appellant to be released on bail with specific conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was arrested for offenses under IPC and SC/ST Act. The appellant sought bail, claiming innocence and no need for custodial interrogation.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant, considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the appellant's argument of innocence, no need for custodial interrogation, and the absence of possibility of absconsion or tampering with evidence.
Final Decision: The appellant was directed to be released on bail with specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Sunita Yadav, J. - This is the first criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short "SC/ST Act") assailing the order dated 14.3.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Shivpuri (M.P.), whereby application preferred by the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
2. The appellant has been arrested by Police Station AJK, District Guna in connection with Crime No. 267/2022 registered in relation to t h e offences punishable under Sections 294, 332, 353, 327, 427 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act.
3. The allegation against the present appellant - accused is that he demanded money for consumption of liquor from the complainant, who is a Post-Master and was on duty, and upon his refusal, present applicant - accused inflicted injuries upon him.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Injuries received by the complainant are simple in nature. Further argument is that the appellant is in custody since 14.2.2023. His custodial interrogation is not required anymore. He is permanent resident of District Guna (M.P.) and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the appellant.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the appeal citing the criminal history of two cases against the appellant and prayed for its dismissal.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it is directed that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
7. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant:-
1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The appellant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future. In case, if he/she is found involving in the offence of same nature, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.
5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
8. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. C.C. as per rules.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of the offense and the likelihood of the appellant's cooperation in the investigati....
The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court has the discretion to allow an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ ST Act and grant bail to the accused, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act in allowing the appeal and granting bail to the appellant.
The court has the discretion to allow bail under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of Section 14-a(2) of the SC/ST act, which allowed for the appellant's release on bail based on the circumstances of the case.
The court considered the appellant's judicial custody, lack of previous similar offenses, and other circumstances in allowing the criminal appeal and granting bail.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence from hostile witnesses and the potential for false implications, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.
The decision to grant bail was based on the appellants' custody period, lack of previous similar or serious offences, and objections raised to granting bail.
The compromise between the parties and the acquittal from certain charges can be considered as changed circumstances warranting bail, and the court may impose specific conditions for the release of t....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.