Allahabad, Sep 1 (ILNS) The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to a man booked under UP Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance, while noting that nothing convincing had been argued on behalf of the complainant & State to deny him bail.
A Single Bench of Justice Arvind Kumar Mishra passed this order while hearing a Criminal Appeal filed by Motilal @ Motiram.
The case pertains to a Criminal Appeal filed by one Motilal @ Motiram who prayed to set aside the order passed by Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Saharanpur on April 07, 2021 in Case under Sections 342, 366, 384, 506 I.P.C. & 3/5 (1) The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance & 67A I.T. Act, Police Station – Kotwali Dehat, District – Saharanpur.
In this Petition, the Appellant claims to have a distinct case from the other co accused, who had directly involved in the process of conversion of religion. The only role he had in the said offence is that he was present on the spot, when conversion of the victim was being made. Except that, there is nothing concrete against him
Counsel for the Appellant said that, he being the neighbor of the victim has been implicated in this case, on account of enmity. The Counsel prayed that the appellant should be granted bail as there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail.
Counsel further said that the appellant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since March 20, 2021. The Counsel from the opposite party, the Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant. The Court after going through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant was rejected, and after considered the rival submissions said that nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the complainant/State so as to justify and sustain the order passed by the court below rejecting the bail application of the appellant.
The Court observed, “Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence, complicity of the accused, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.”
The Court set aside the order passed on April 07, 2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant and granted bail to the appellant.
The Court said, “Let the accused-appellant Motilal @ Motiram involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing personal bonds and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that he shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
The Court said, “It is made clear that advantage of this bail shall not go to the other co-accused of this case as their cases are distinguishable from the appellant.” /ILNS/AP/SNG