Allowed

Sonu Alias Israk Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 May 2023/85/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appellant challenged the Special Judge's order rejecting his bail in a case involving rape and atrocities against SCs. The bench noted the FIR was lodged with a 10-day delay without explanation, the victim's statement showed contradictions, and medical reports did not corroborate the offense. Finding the lower court failed to appreciate material evidence, the appeal was allowed, setting aside t

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 10.12.2021 set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond, sureties, and strict undertakings regarding attendance, tampering, and adjournments.

Sonu Alias Israk Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 85 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Sonu Alias Israk Khan Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Singh Chauhan,Anil Kumar Mishra,Atul Verma,Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Saggir,Vinod Kumar Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vinay Kumar Dubey

¶5

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶6

1. Heard Ms. Archana Yadav, holding brief of Sri Brijesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Alok Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. However, no one appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 despite name of Sri Vinay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 is printed in the cause list.

¶7

2. This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 10.12.2021 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, in Bail Application No.3041 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No.252 of 2021, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(2) (VA), 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Bazar Shukla, District Amethi, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the first information report has been lodged against the appellant on the basis of false and fabricated facts. The accused/ appellant is innocent who has been falsely implicated in this case to wreck vengeance.

¶9

4. Her further submission is that the first information report came to be lodged after an inordinate delay of 10 days without

¶10

offering any explanation therefor. She has also submitted that the victim is major and there are material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. insofar as the alleged participation of accused is concerned. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim had stated that there was one more accused person beside the present appellant which is nothing but an after thought improvement, which shows that the prosecution story is false ab initio . She has also submitted that medical report of the victim does not corroborate the commission of offence. The accused/ appellant is languishing in jail since 11.11.2021 who has no previous criminal history.

¶11

5. Her further submission is that in case, the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. She has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

¶12

6. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed. The impugned order dated 10.12.2021 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, in Bail Application No.3041 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No.252 of 2021, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(2)(VA), 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Bazar Shukla, District Amethi, deserves to be set aside and consequently, the accused/ appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶13

7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that the accused/ appellant has committed

¶14

a heinous offence. Therefore, the accused / appellant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions.

¶15

8. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that the first information report came to be lodged under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(2)(VA), 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act with an inordinate delay of 10 days without any plausible explanation. The victim, in her statement, has stated that there was one more accused person beside the present appellant which is nothing but an after thought improvement. Medical report of the victim does not support the prosecution version. The accused/ appellant is languishing in jail since 11.11.2021 who has no previous criminal history.

¶16

9. Considering the aforesaid overall facts and circumstance of the case and without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

¶17

10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed . Consequently, the impugned judgment and order dated 10.12.2021 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, in Bail Application No.3041 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No.252 of 2021, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(2)(VA), 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Bazar Shukla, District Amethi is set aside.

¶18

11. Let the appellant, Sonu Alias Israk Khan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number with the following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The appellant shall furnish a personal bond with two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶20

(ii) The appellant shall appear and strictly comply following terms of bond executed under section 437 sub section 3 of Chapter- 33 of Cr.P.C.:-

¶21

(a) The appellant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter.

¶22

(b) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected, and

¶23

(c) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶24

(iii) The appellant shall cooperate with investigation /trial.

¶25

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶26

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶27

(vi) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, in order to secure his presence, proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant fails to appear before the

¶28

court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶29

(vii) The appellant shall remain present, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law.

¶30

Order Date :- 1.5.2023 Saurabh

¶31

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sonu Alias Israk Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Alias Israk Khan 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

Ruchi Singh Vs State of U.P Thru Prin. Secy Home. and Others

C.B. Singh @ Chandra Bhawan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Abhishek Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home and Another

Abhishek Singh and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rakesh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Ansar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Up Lko. and Another