Allowed

Gopal Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 May 2023CRLA/1614/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail appeal filed under the SC/ST Act, the Allahabad High Court set aside the lower court's order rejecting bail. The court held that the trial court failed to consider facts properly, ignored the accused side, and contributed to five to six times overcrowding in jails. Consequently, the appellant was enlarged on bail on personal bond and sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties in the like amount subject to standard conditions including presence in court and no tampering with evidence.

Gopal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:103155

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1614 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Gopal Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Despite service of notice, no one has turned up to oppose the appeal.

¶7

Heard Sri S.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1; Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed 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 17.01.2023, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Siddharth Nagar in Bail Application No. 11/2023, has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 251 of 2022, under Sections 354, 376, 458, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1) (da), 3(1) (dha), 3(2) (v), 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Uska Bazar, District Siddharth Nagar.

¶9

There is allegation in the FIR that the husband of the informant resides outside. She lives in her matrimonial home with her son aged about three years. The co-accused, Sharvan Yadav, is alleged to have forcibly committed the offence of rape for a long time and made her obscene video. He repeatedly raped her on the threat of making her alleged video viral.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no such video was recovered by the Investigating Officer from the coaccused or the appellant. There is no evidence of any such video being made viral from mobile phone of appellant or any other person. The allegation made by the victim is incorrect because she is residing in her matrimonial home alongwith her minor child and other family members of matrimonial home are also residing around her house. As per the medico-legal report no mark of injury was found on her body. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of malicious

¶11

prosecution of appellant under the provisions of SC/ST Act. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 19.12.2022. 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 the above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 17.01.2023 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, Gopal Yadav 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)

¶19

framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

13. The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶27

Order Date :- 11.5.2023 Abhishek

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gopal Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Yadav 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

Brahmdev Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gabbar Sharma @ Deepu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saurabh Rajpoot @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Badshah Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja @ Rajat Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Veerpal Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another