Criminal Appeal filed challenging bail rejection order. Court held trial unlikely to conclude soon and allowed appeal, quashing impugned order, releasing appellant on personal bond with two sureties.
Impugned order dated 01.05.2018 set aside; appellant released on bail on personal bond and two reliable sureties with specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3434 of 2018
Appellant :- Bantu Khan @ Afsaar Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Rafeek Ahmad Khan,Akhilesh Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Annexure CA-1 of the counter affidavit filed by learned AGA indicates that notice has been served on the mother of the victim.
Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned A.G.A. for the StateRespondent and perused the paper book.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed questioning the correctness of the order 1.5.2018 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST)/ Additional Session Judge (FTC), Mahoba in Bail Application no. 251 of 2018 (Bantu Khan @ Afsaar Khan vs. State of U.P. in Case Crime no. 130 of 2018, u/s 354ka, 336, 376, 452, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5)(A), 3(1)B(1), 3(1)D and 3(1)Dh SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Mahoba, District Mahoba whereby his prayer for bail has been rejected.
It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the prosecutrix is aged about 21 years. The F.I.R. was lodged by the prosecutrix herself in which she has only made allegation of outraging modesty and also of extending threats for life, there is no allegation of rape either in the F.I.R. or in the statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. However, subsequently, in the statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she has developed version that the applicant used to purchase goods from her shop and whenever nobody was present in the house he used to physically assault her. Learned counsel states that no reliance can be placed on the statement of the victim, who is grown up girl aged about 21 years and she has changed her version from stage to stage. The applicant is in jail since 22.3.2018.
Per contra learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and supported the impugned order. However he could not point out anything material on the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance and it is, accordingly, allowed. Impugned order dated 1.5.2018 is, hereby, set aside.
Let appellant, Bantu Khan @ Afsaar Khan be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(i). The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, if the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in
accordance with law;
(ii). The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(iii). In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 20.8.2018 Dhirendra/
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Appeal challenging the rejection of bail should be allowed.
Whether the appellant is entitled to release on bail in the circumstances.
Whether the impugned order rejecting bail can be set aside.
10 provisions across 2 enactments
Bantu Khan @ Afsaar Khan
State Of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
