Allowed

Mahipal Ahir v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 May 2023CRLA/397/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the orders of the Special Judge rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The Court noted procedural irregularities, overcrowding issues, and one-sided investigation, and granted bail subject to standard conditions without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

The appellant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to conditions regarding tampering, attending hearings, and expeditious trial.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:103809

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 397 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Mahipal Ahir Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Raja Ram Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Virendra Singh Parmar

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

1.Heard Shri Raja Ram Kushwaha, learned counsel for the appellant; Shri Virendra Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

2.The present criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 16.12.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hamirpur has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 217 of 2022, under Sections 376,452,323 IPC and Section 3(2) V, 3(2) 5A SC/ST Act, Police Station Chikasi, District Hamirpur.

¶8

3.The allegation in the First Information Report is that in the night door was knocked , it was opened by the victim in hope that it was her husband but the appellant entered in her house and committed offence of rape rape.

¶9

4.Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that from the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. it is clear that after appellant entered into her house she bolted the two doors from inside,thereafter her husband came then the appellant ran away.The victim is clearly consenting party and she willingly entered into physical relation with appellant.It is not a case of forceful commission of offence of rape.Had her husband not come on the wrong time, implication of appellant would never have been made by her. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case.It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. He has no criminal

¶10

history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 29.11.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted that two minor injuries on the person of victim has not been explained.In case it is a case consenting injury should not have been caused.

¶12

5.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

After hearing the rival contentions, it appears that husband of the victim came at the wrong time and it probable that he beaten the victim.

¶14

6.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 case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 16.12.2022 is, hereby, set aside.

¶15

7.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 undertrial 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

8.Let appellant, Mahipal Ahir be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in

¶17

the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶18

(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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

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

¶20

(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

9.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 sufÏcient 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

10.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.

¶26

11.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

¶27

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.

¶28

12.The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶29

Order Date :- 12.5.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶30

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahipal Ahir v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahipal Ahir 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

Badshah Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Gopal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Awadhesh Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhanu Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another