Allowed

Rambachan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Aug 2021CRLA/100/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against rejection of bail in a case under the SC/ST Act and IPC, the court found that the appellants had made out a prima facie case for bail. It set aside the lower court orders and granted bail with stringent conditions to ensure appearance and cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Release of appellants on bail subject to conditions including furnishing bond, sureties, and undertaking not to seek adjournments or delay the trial.

Rambachan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 100 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Rambachan And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pratibha Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh,Rajesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Case called out.

¶6

Sri Rajesh Singh, learned counsel for the appellants/applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

¶7

Despite clear directions given by this court on earlier occasion, no one appears through Sushil Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.

¶8

In these circumstances, with the help of the learned A.G.A. I am proposing to decide the case on merits.

¶9

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the impugned orders dated 05.11.2020 and 09.12.2020 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kaushambi in Case Crime No.250 of 2020 under Sections 147, 149, 304, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(V), 3(2)Va, 3(2) Gha SC/ST Act, Police Station-Karari, DistrictKaushabmi.

¶10

I have perused the earlier order of this Court dated 08.07.2021 in which it was made clear that despite of the fact that notices were duly served upon opposite party no.2, they have not come forward with any counter version of the case. Taking the service upon them to be sufficient, the Court is proceeded to decide the case on merits with the aid and help of learned A.G.A. Pleadings qua learned A.G.A. is complete and the matter is ripe for final submissions.

¶11

Submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants/applicants is that the present F.I.R. has been lodged against five persons under sections 147, 149, 304, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(V), 3(2)Va, 3(2) Gha SC/ST Act,Police StationKarari, District-Kaushabmi. As per F.I.R. version, the appellants/applicants along with other 2 persons assaulted Santoshi Devi, mother of the informant, as a result of which

¶12

Santoshi Devi received injuries and died. It is further contended that general role of causing injury with lathi, danda has been assigned to all of them. Contention raised that from the perusal of the statement of witnesses, it is clear that the co-accused Harish Chandra was the author of the incident. However, coaccused Harish Chandra was admitted on bail and his appeal was allowed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.880 of 2021. Taking into account the totality of the circumstances and moreover, the appellants/applicants belong to the same caste, the prosecution ought to be much more clear and vigilant in pasting the SC/ST Act against the appellants/applicants. Taking into account the totality of the circumstances and in the absence of any medical evidence with regard to the allegation of rape, the appellant who are languishing in jail since 03.09.2020, deserves to be released on bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶14

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, and the period of detention already undergone, and also without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶15

Let the appellant-Rambachan, Gyan Singh and Jay Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) THE APPELLANTS WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.

¶17

(ii) THE APPELLANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN 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.

¶18

(iii) THE APPELLANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT

¶19

BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST THEM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶20

(iv) IN CASE, THE APPELLANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPELLANTS FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶21

(v) THE APPELLANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPELLANTS ARE DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶22

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellants/applicnts, shall have serious repercussion on their bail so granted by this court.

¶23

Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned orders dated 05.11.2020 and 09.12.2020 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kaushambi in Case Crime No.250 of 2020 under Sections 147, 149, 304, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(V), 3(2)Va, 3(2) Gha SC/ST Act, Police Station-Karari, DistrictKaushabmi, is hereby set aside.

¶24

Order Date :- 13.8.2021 Pr/-

Rambachan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambachan and 2 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Faeem Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Narayan and and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahjad Vs State of Up and Anothers

Khursheed and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sintu @ Vishal Vs state of up & others