Criminal appeal regarding bail rejection in a case involving alleged rape under SC/ST Act and IPC offences. Court allowed appeal and released appellants on bond and two sureties.
Appellants released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties each; impugned order dated 29.1.2020 set aside.
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. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3071 of 2020
Appellant :- Shohrat Madar And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Jitendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rahul Saxena
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel for the appellants-applicants, Sri Rahul Saxena, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellants- Shohrat Madar and Mohd. Ahmad @ Ahmad Madar with the prayer to set aside the order dated 29.1.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pilibhit in Bail Application No. 122 of 2020 rejecting the bail application in Case Crime No. 1022 of 2016 under Sections 452, 376D, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S.Sungarhi, District- Pilibhit.
Allegations in the first information report are that forcefully rape was committed upon the informant by locking the door from inside by the applicants, one by one.
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellantsapplicants that the appellants are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated for ulterior motives. It is next submitted that serious civil dispute is going on between the parties. It is next submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not complained of any sexual assault committed upon her. Police after due investigation has submitted final report in this case and thus have not found the alleged offence to be made out. However, on protest filed against the final report, the same has been treated as a complaint case and the applicants were issued summons and their bail application has been rejected. It is further submitted that even in the statement of the victim she has mentioned about the land dispute going on between the applicants and the father in law of the informant. It is also argued that the applicants are having criminal history of two cases, in which they have been enlarged on bail, as is mentioned in paragraph no.17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and appeal. It is also submitted that though the final report has been submitted in the present case, but in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in
the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.1.2020.
Per contra, the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the counsel for the complainant as well as the learned A.G.A. but they could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellants-applicants has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal. Nothing convincing has been argued so as to justify and sustain the order of the court below rejecting the bail applications of the appellants.
Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence, complicity of accused, I am of the view that the appellants have made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 29.1.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellants is set aside.
Let the above named accused-appellants involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicants shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official is further directed to verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 8.1.2021 Deepika
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail after the rejection of bail application by the trial court.
Whether the final report submitted by police affects the probability of conviction bail decision.
Whether maintaining the bail rejection order is justified in the given facts and circumstances.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shohrat Madar
Mohd. Ahmad
State of U.P.
Ajit Kumar
J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
