Allowed

Netrapal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2023CRLA/3870/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against the rejection of bail filed by an appellant charged under the SC/ST Act and IPC. Setting aside the trial court's order, the Court granted bail citing overcrowding and Article 21, without expressing an opinion on the case merits, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding witness intimidation, court attendance, and no criminal activity.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:143069

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3870 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Netrapal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Alok Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Yashpal Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

List has been revised. Despite service of notice upon the opposite party no.2, no one appears on his behalf.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

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 06.02.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No.2, Shahjahanpur has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 803 of 2022, under Sections 376, 506 of IPC, and Section 3(2)5, 3(1)r, s of SC/ST Act, Police Station Tilhar, District Shahjanapur.

¶10

As per the FIR the case of the prosecution is that on 02.11.2022 at around 7.00 am when victim/informant was taking out 'Kande' suddenly appellant came from behind and caught her. Appellant dragged her to nearby field and committed rape with her.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that in the FIR itself there is no allegation that appellant used caste related words against the prosecutrix. During her medical examination no injury was seen on her person and no spermatozoa was found. It is submitted that prior to this incident the appellant had lodged an FIR having Crime No.587/2022 under Section 376 of IPC and section 3/4 of POCSO Act against one Jaiveer, who has committed rape with the daughter of the appellant. For that reason this false FIR has been lodged. It is submitted that medical report also does not corroborate the version

¶12

of the prosecution. It is submitted that appellant has criminal history to his credit which are duly explained in para 3 of supplementary affidavit. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. Applicant is languishing in jail since 24.11.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶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 he could not point out any material to the contrary.

¶14

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the trial court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the trial court dated 6.2.2023 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; 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.

¶16

Let appellant, Netrapal 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:

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶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

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶27

Order Date :- 19.7.2023 Mohit

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Netrapal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Netrapal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vivek Rastogi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Boby and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vimal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Premkant Yadav Vs State of U.P.