Criminal Appeal filed under SC/ST Act, 1989 challenging rejection of bail. Learned counsel argued false implication with victim testimony suggesting consensual relationship. Court deemed it a fit case for bail despite gravity of offense. Appeal allowed and bail granted.
Appellant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties.
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. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1831 of 2019
Appellant :- Nitish Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ganga Bhushan Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 01.02.2019 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge IInd/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Aligarh, in Bail Application No. 542/2019 (Nitish Vs. State), arising out of Case Crime No.829 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Tappal, District Aligarh, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case due to ulterior motive. He submitted that victim in her statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has said that she had gone with Nitish with her own sweet will and in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has said that she gone with her friend to NOIDA with her own sweet will and the name of friend is Nitish. She further deposed that she had gone with Nitish with her own sweet will without telling to her parents. She further deposed that Nitish has not done anything against her. She further deposed that she wanted to marry with Nitish. She further said that she wanted to go with Nitish. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she said that she is 18 years of age and as per medico legal report she is about 17 years of age. The appellant is in jail since 15.01.2019.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, considering the statement of the girl recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the aforementioned order is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant Nitish be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 2.5.2019
R./
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail in a case under Sections 363, 366, 323 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act where the victim allegedly went with the accused willingly.
Whether the evidence and victim statements justify granting bail in an appeal under Section 14(2) of the SC/ST Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nitish
State Of U.P. And Another
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
