Allowed

Monu Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jun 2023CRLA/234/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal against the rejection of a bail application under the SC/ST Act, the High Court set aside the order of the Special Judge. Citing delays in trial, overcrowding, and lack of proper consideration by the lower court, the court granted bail to the appellant on specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions prohibiting witness intimidation and ensuring court attendance; trial court directed to conclude trial within six

Monu Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:125666

¶3

Reserved On:- 29.05.2023 Delivered On:- 08.06.2023

¶4

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 234 of 2021 Appellant :- Monu Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mayank Kumar Gupta,Navin Kumar,Pankaj Bharti,R.K. Mishra,Ramesh Kumar Saxena,Sudhir Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth, J.

¶6

Heard Shri R.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A.

¶7

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 30.10.2020 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kanpur Nagar has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 361 of 2018, under Sections- 302, 307 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Govind Nagar, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶8

This is second criminal appeal of the appellant.

¶9

The first criminal appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed by this Court on 20.05.2019, directing the trial court to expedite the proceedings of the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible within six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶10

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that before the trial court, six prosecution witnesses have been examined. The statement of P.W.6 was recorded on 12.09.2022, thereafter the prosecution witnesses are not turning up and dates are being fixed for recording of the evidence. He has submitted that when the first appeal of the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 3150 of 2019 was rejected. The trial court was directed to conclude the trial within period of six months by the order dated 20.05.2019. This is the first implication of the appellant and he is in jail since 12.11.2018.

¶12

Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the appeal of the appellant.

¶13

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 they could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

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 30.10.2020 is, hereby, set aside.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

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.

¶18

Let appellant, Monu 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:

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law within a period of

¶26

¶27

six months after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶28

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.

¶29

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶30

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the

¶31

trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days.

¶32

Order Date :- 08.06.2023 Rohit

¶33

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

Monu Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu Singh 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

Arun Kumar Alias Gaurav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Irfan Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikram Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mustafa Vs State of U.P. and Another

Awadhesh Karan @ Lala Vs State of U.P. and Another