Allowed

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2023CRLA/1058/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In criminal appeal alleging false implication and malicious prosecution under the SC/ST Act, the court quashed the Special Judge's bail rejection order. Citing jail overcrowding, delayed trial, and lack of specific contradictory material from the prosecution, the court enlarged the bail application and released the appellant on bond and sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of appellant on personal bond and two reliable sureties each in like amount subject to specified conditions regarding witness tampering, court appearance, and non-commission of crime.

Rakesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1058 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Rakesh Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ghanshyam Das Mishra,Hans Nath Pandey

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra,Shri Ram (Rawat)

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned A.G.A for opposite party no.1; Sri Ram Rawat, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A is taken on record.

¶8

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 16.09.2021 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Agra has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 584 of 2021, under Sections- 376-D, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of I.T. Act and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Jagdishpura, District- Agra

¶9

Despite service of notice on Sri Ram Rawat, counsel for the informant, no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

¶10

There is allegation against the appellant regarding commission of offence of gang rape, threatening and offence under Section 67 of I.T. Act against woman belonging to schedule caste.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant has placed before this Court the statement of the victim wherein she has not made any allegation against the appellant and order of bail of co-accused, Gopal, who has already been enlarged on bail by the Court below way back on 22.12.2022. The appellant alleges false implication in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 07.11.2021. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of SC/ST Act. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court below has not properly considered the facts of the case. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 16.09.2021 is, hereby, set aside.

¶14

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let appellant, Rakesh Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶16

(i) 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.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

(iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, 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 of Cr.P.C.

¶19

(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 the trial court.

¶20

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶21

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.

¶23

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶24

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶25

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶26

Order Date :- 25.4.2023 Rohit

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Abhishek Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mithlesh Kumar Mishra @ Mithlesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyanarayan Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abdul Rahman Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalees Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishan Kumar Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.