Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:133662

Court No. - 85

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4997 of 2023

Appellant :- Aasif

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Pathak,Arvind Kumar Tewari

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

List has been revised. Despite service of notice upon the

opposite party no.2, no one appears on his behalf.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for

opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled

Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has

been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order

dated 28.03.2023 and 07.04.2023 whereby the Special Judge,

SC/ST Act, Aligarh has rejected the bail application of the

appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 32 of 2023, under

Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 3(2) V SC/ST Act

and Section 25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Harduaganj,

District Aligarh.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellant

is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is

submitted that in the incident none has sustained firearm injury

while it is alleged that appellant along with co-accused Arif

fired with a country made pistol. It is further submitted that no

caste related words were hurled by the appellant. The injuries

sustained by Vishal and Satyendra are simple in nature. It is

further submitted that after four days of the incident the alleged

weapon used in the crime was handed over to the police by a

private person. It is also submitted that appellant also sustained

injuries in the incident and FIR was lodged by the father of the

appellant. It is submitted that injuries sustained by Shashi Devi

are also found to be simple in nature. It is submitted that

appellant has criminal history to his credit which are duly

explained in para 17 of the bail application. It is a case of

malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act.

Applicant is languishing in jail since 20.01.2023. In case, the

appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of

bail.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by

the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant

of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved

are very serious in nature but he could not point out any

material to the contrary.

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the

parties and from perusal of material on record that the court

below has not properly considered the case of the appellant.

Hence, in view of above consideration, the orders of rejection

of bail passed by the court below dated 28.03.2023 and

07.04.2023 are, hereby, set aside.

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above,

finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the appellant; appellant being under-trial having

fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of

the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding

in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Court

is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on

bail.

Let appellant, Aasif be released on bail in the aforesaid case

crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two

reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of

the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

(i) 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.

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution

witnesses.

(iii) The appellant shal