Criminal Appeal against bail refusal under SC/ST Act. Court held non-mention in FIR and bail for co-accused by co-ordinate bench were strong grounds. Appeal allowed, impugned bail order quashed, and bail granted on conditions.
Appellant released on bail by personal bond and two sureties; impugned order dated 09.06.2021 quashed.
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. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2925 of 2021
Appellant :- Vikram Respondent :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Manvendra Singh,Vijay Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Sri D.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 today in the Court, has filed counter affidavit through e-mode.
Heard Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri D.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Ghanshyam Kumar, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The learned counsel for the appellant does not want to file any rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the State as well as opposite party no. 2.
By means of the appeal u/s 14 (A)(2) SC/ST Act, the appellant is challenging the order dated 09.06.2021 whereby the bail application of the appellant was rejected by Learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Fatehpur in Case Crime No. 83 of 2020, u/s 302, 34 IPC and section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Malwan, District Fatehpur.
Contention raised by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is not named in FIR. The FIR was lodged by Dhaniram on 17.05.2020 for the incident said to have taken place on the same day against unknown person. It is further contended that during the course of the investigation, the name of Sanjay Paswan, Rajol Paswan and the present appellant has been came into light. It is further contended that the co-accused Sanjay Paswan and Rajol Paswan have already been granted bail bu coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2366/2020, and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 29330/2021on different occassion. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that role of the present appellant stands on the similar footing to the co-accused persons.
Learned AGA as well as Sri D.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant.
The submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.
Keeping in view the totality of circumstances and the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a fit
case for bail.
Let the appellant Vikram, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two 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:-
(i) THE APPELLANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPELLANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPELLANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPELLANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT IS 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
Keeping in view that though the complainant belongs to the S.C. community and as per arguments of learned counsel for the complainant that the accused appellant would create all sorts of impediments in the smooth trial. Besides this, after the release the accused appellant who
belong to a higher caste may extend threat and pressurize the witnesses.
All these complaints may be raised by the complainant before S.P. Fatehpur who would examine objectively after having reports from his agencies at the earliest with regard to threat prospective of informant and his family members and use his own discretion in the matter, if it desirable, then during trial may provide security to complainant and his near family members.
With the aforesaid observation the present criminal appeal stands allowed and the impugned order dated order dated 09.06.2021 passed by Learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Fatehpur is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Nisha
Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.10.02 14:32:30 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted when the appellant did not appear in the original FIR as the accused.
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail from a coordinate bench having due regard to the stage of investigation and co-accused bail.
7 provisions across 3 enactments
Vikram
State Of U.P
Another
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
