Allowed

Rajesh Tiwari and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2023CRLA/4994/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged the rejection of bail in an SC/ST atrocity case. The single judge set aside the impugned order, citing Article 21 and extreme jail overcrowding. Without expressing an opinion on merits, the Court released the appellants on bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellants released on bond and two reliable sureties each upon setting aside the order rejecting bail.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:133469

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4994 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Rajesh Tiwari And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Singh Sengar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Aniruddh Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellanst, learned AGA for state and learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

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 05.04.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia has rejected the bail application of the appellants moved by them in Case Crime No. 448 of 2023, under Sections 295, 436, 504 IPC and Section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dh) 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Chitwara Gaon, District Ballia.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that first information report has been lodged on the basis of suspicion and hearsay of evidence. It is submitted that coaccused Ravindra Tiwari has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 31.05.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.4403 of 2023. He further submits that since the role of the appellants is identical to that of the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, they are also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Appellants are languishing in jail since 08.03.2023 and 07.03.2023 respectively having no criminal history. In case, the appellants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

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 appellants and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature but he could not dispute the fact that co-accused

¶11

has already been granted bail.

¶12

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 8.2.2023 is, hereby, set aside.

¶13

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 appellants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let appellants, Rajesh Tiwari and Gyan Prakash be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their 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:

¶15

(i) The appellants 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.

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) The appellants 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.

¶18

(iv) The appellants 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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

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 appellants, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶23

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.

¶24

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶25

Order Date :- 6.7.2023 Mohit

¶26

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

Rajesh Tiwari and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Tiwari and Another 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

Ashok Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Asif Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gullu @ Umesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Riyaz Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another