Higher court allowed criminal appeal under SC/ST Act, quashing order rejected bail, ruling appellant entitled to bail due to co-accused release and jail overcrowding, imposing strict conditions.
Bail granted to appellant; impugned order dated 06.12.2022 set aside; appellant to furnish personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.
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. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 195 of 2023
Appellant :- Abdul Rahman Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vipul Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Vipul Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1, Sri Sanjeev Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record.
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 06.12.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Azamgarh has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 193 of 2020, under Sections 376D I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST(PA) Act, Police Station- Kaptanganj, District Azamgarh.
The co-accused, Abdul Kalam, has been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1754 of 2021. The prayer for release of the applicant on bail on the ground of parity has been made. The appellant is languishing in jail since 14.11.2022.
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.
Considering the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and for the reasons disclosed in the order of co-accused, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail.
In view of above, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 06.12.2022 is, hereby, set aside.
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 considering the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court, 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.
Let appellant, Abdul Rahman , 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:
(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.
(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(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.
(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.
(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
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.
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.
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.
The criminal appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 25.4.2023 SS
Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a criminal undertrial accused should be granted bail given his co-accused released on identical facts without detailed opinion on merits.
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail in view of jail overcrowding and fundamental right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Whether to quash the impugned order rejecting bail in a case involving serious charges under IPC Section 376D and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Abdul Rahman
State of U.P.
Another
Siddharth
Surendar Singh Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
