Allowed

Satendra Rathaur v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2019CRLA/4647/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, this court allowed the appellant's petition, set aside the lower court's bail rejection, and released him on bail with conditions to expeditiously conclude the trial.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond, two heavy sureties (one family member), and standard bail conditions; trial expedited within six months.

Satendra Rathaur Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4647 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Satendra Rathaur Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Kumar Singh,Amit Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 22.5.2019 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Jalaun in Bail Application no. 55 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime no. 197 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, 7/8 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Rampura, District- Jalaun, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶7

In para- 4 of the counter affidavit filed by Circle Officer, Madhogarh, DistrictJalaun, it has been stated that notice/information about the pendency of the present criminal appeal before this Court has been given to opposite party no. 2, however despite service of notice none has appeared on his behalf.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the appellant has next drawn the attention of the Court towards the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which it has been stated that the appellant met her while she was returning back from his school and asked her to sit on his motor-cycle and while they were going towards Auraiya, the appellant alongwith her was apprehended by her family members and they were brought to the police station and the first information report was lodged. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that the allegation of kidnapping is absolutely false and cooked up. According to the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she was recovered on the same day and no alarm whatsoever was raised by her while she was being taken away by the motor-cycle. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that appellant is in jail since 14.11.2018 and has no criminal history to his credit and there is no chance of appellant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the witnesses.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the appellant is in jail since 14.11.2018 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and

¶11

circumstances, the appeal has substance. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

¶12

The impugned order dated 22.5.2019 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Jalaun, is set-aside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.

¶13

Let the appellant Satendra Rathaur be released on bail in Case Crime No. Case Crime no. 197 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, 7/8 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Rampura, District- Jalaun, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned and one surety shall be family member of the applicant, subject to the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) The appellant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶15

(ii) The appellant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) The appellant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the appellant to prison.

¶18

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible preferably with a period of six months form the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another, report in AIR 2018 (SC) 2004 , if there is no other legal impediment.

¶19

Order Date :- 16.10.2019 KU

Satendra Rathaur v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satendra Rathaur v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pala and Others Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kuraisha Begam and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ayodhya Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Bahadure Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Santosh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bauwa @ Narendra Vs State of U.P. and Another