Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38376 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12404 of 2024 Appellant :- Akshay Jaiswal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ambreen Masroor,Sadrul Islam Jafri,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- B.S. Pandey,G.A.,Kartikey Pandey Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Akshay Jaiswal with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 21.11.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Basti and to release the appellant on bail in case crime no. 313 of 2021 under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Purani Basti, District Basti. 2. Heard Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant / respondent no.2 as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. . 3. On 24.10.2021 an altercation took place between the brother of the informant and the named accused person - present appellant when his motorcycle collided with the cycle of the injured. The appellant started beating the injured and in continuation thereof he also made a blow upon the injured with the aid of weighing machine and its weight which was taken by him from a nearby shop and on account of the said injury the injured died on the spot. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation now charge sheet has been submitted. 4. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is further submitted that if the prosecution story is taken as true, then also case does not travel beyond the scope of Section 304(Part-II) IPC. It was a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder because the assault was made by the appellant in a grave and sudden provocation and the incident was never premeditated. It is further submitted that the medical evidence does not corroborate the prosecution version. It is also submitted that essential ingredients to constitute offence under SC/ST Act are completely missing in this case. Trial is going on in a very slow speed and may take too much time to be concluded finally. Criminal history of the appellant has been explained sufficiently. The Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 24.10.2021. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant / respondent party no.2 opposing the prayer for grant of bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the deceased belonged to SC/ST community. The assault was made with intention to kill. The statements of eye witnesses of the occurrence, who have been interrogated by the I.O. of this case, are sufficient to explain that after beating the deceased with kicking and fisting an overt act was done by the appellant when he further caused blow upon the deceased with the aid of weighing machine and its weight. Medical evidence corroborates the prosecution version and the doctor, who performed the post mortem of the deceased, has found three serious ante mortem injuries and fractures in left frontal side scalp bone and left side of the occipital bone, which caused his death. It is further submitted that the lady, from whose shop the appellant brought the weighing machine and its weight, has also corroborated the prosecution version. There is absolutely no reason for false implication of the appellant in this case. It is a case of murder of a tender age boy who, according to the F.I.R., was aged about 17 years only and was a student of Class-Xth. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order and appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 7. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court concerned has properly considered the case of the appellant while deciding the bail application. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role of the appellant, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has not made out a case for bail. The Court concerned passed a reasoned order while rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order does not suffer from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be affirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed. 9. However, the trial court is expected to make all endeavours to decide the trial of this case as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. 10. It is made clear that the submissions / observation made in this order are only for deciding the bail application / appeal and the trial court shall not be influenced in any way with the said observations / submissions while deciding the trial. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad