Dismissed

Dhruvchandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023CRLA/3434/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

TheAllahabad High Court dismissed an appeal against the rejection of bail in a rape and SC/ST Act case. Upholding the trial court's finding of active participation in the crime and corroborated victim testimony, the court held the appeal lacked merit while directing trial expeditions.

What did the court decide?

Criminal appeal dismissed; trial court directed to expedite trial within one year.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:139007

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3434 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Dhruvchandra Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Ram Dubey,Deepak Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Narsingh Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellants with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 05.05.2022 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Basti in Bail Application No. 574 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 183 of 2020, under Sections 376(1) IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sonha, District Basti.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. did not mention the name of appellant but stated that appellant himself introduced his name, when he was leaving the place of incident after committing rape with the victim. During medical examination no finding about committing rape was observed. The appellant committed rape with the victim about 3-4 hours. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of the informant and the victim recorded during trial. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that there is no chance of the appellant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellant is languishing in jail since 22.07.2020 having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by learned counsel for informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. consistently corroborated that the

¶10

appellant established physical relations forcefully with her and introduced himself. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. specifically mentioned the name of the appellant involved in the incident. It is also submitted that on reading of statements of the victim and informant as a whole, they have corroborated the prosecution version.

¶11

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the active participation of the appellant in the commission of crime, I do not find it fit case for bail.

¶12

Since the trial court has passed the impugned order after appreciating the evidence available on record, there is no occasion to interfere with the finding of fact recorded by the trial court, hence, the present criminal appeal lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed.

¶13

Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed .

¶14

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and make every endeavour to conclude the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties subject to full co-operation by the appellant, if there is no legal impediment.

¶15

Order Date :- 13.7.2023 Prajapati

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhruvchandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruvchandra 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

Anil Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Israr Shekh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bantu Vs State of Up Thro Principal Secretary Home Gov of Up

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another