In this criminal appeal, the Allahabad High Court allowed the appeal against the rejection of bail and ordered the release of the accused-appellant who was accused of rape and cheating under the SC/ST Act.
Bail rejected by lower court set aside; appellant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to cooperation in trial.
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. - 3194 of 2020
Appellant :- Omkar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Vijay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicantappellant, Sri Sandeep Tripathi, 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 appellant- Omkar with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 29.10.2020 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Rape and POCSO, Shamli in Bail Application No. 1421 of 2020 in Case Crime No. 525 of 2020 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Section 67 of I.T. Act and Section 3(2) (5) Ka SC/ST Act, P.S.Kandhla, District- Shamli.
As per the allegations made in the first information report, the accused applicant only with co accused Dharmpal virtually deceived the informant on the ground that they will facilitate finances against the registry of his house. They neither returned the registry nor, made available the loan and further they committed rape upon her one by one on several occasions.
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellantapplicant that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated for ulterior motive. It is also argued that it is all a cock and bull story in the first information report. The victim is major and there is no evidence to the effect that the applicant ever committed sexual violence on her by committing rape. The medical examination report does not support the theory of rape as developed in the first information report. It is also stated that there is no previous criminal history to the credit of applicant. It is further argued by the learned counsel that 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 21.08.2020.
Though the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the learned A.G.A. but he could not dispute the aforesaid facts including the fact that applicant has no previous criminal history to his credit.
I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant-applicant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal 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 appellant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 29.10.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.
Let the above named accused-appellant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicant 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 :- 6.1.2021 IrfanUddin
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant was entitled to bail in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Whether the rejection of bail by the lower court was right.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Omkar
State of U.P.
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
