Dismissed

Kavi Shankar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Jul 2023CRLA/5025/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal, the Allahabad High Court affirmed the Special Judge's order rejecting the appellant's bail application. The Court dismissed the appeal, holding the appellant was not entitled to bail, while limiting observations to the bail determination only.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed; the appellant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Kavi Shankar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140888

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5025 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Kavi Shankar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Yadav,Pooja Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record.

¶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 18.03.2023, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sonbhadra has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No.273 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Chopan, District Sonbhadra.

¶10

As per the FIR the case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix was alone in her house on 05.10.2022 at around 7.00 pm. Appellant entered her house and committed rape upon her and abused her with caste related words.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case for the reason that appellant gave some money to the father of the victim and when he asked to return, he implicated in the present case. It is submitted that on the date of occurrence appellant was receiving treatment at B.H.U., Varanasi and was staying in Arvi Residency, Guest House. It is submitted that no finding of rape was recorded during the medical examination of the prosecutrix. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged with the delay of about one month and no explanation is offered for such delay. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act.

¶12

Applicant is languishing in jail since 28.02.2023 having no criminal history. 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 argued that so far as the entry of the appellant in the guest house is concerned, it indicates the time of departure as 06.10.2022 at 11.00 but no time of arrival is mentioned. It is also submitted that victim in her statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has consistently narrated about the incident and made allegation that appellant committed rape with her. The statement of the father of the prosecutrix is also brought on record to whom the prosecutrix narrated the entire story. It is submitted that so far as the plea of alibi is concerned, it relates to trial. However, the evidence is not supporting that appellant was at Varanasi for his treatment at the time of occurrence.

¶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 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 18.03.2023 is affirmed.

¶15

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding no force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

¶16

The criminal appeal is dismissed.

¶17

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 17.7.2023 Mohit

¶20

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

Kavi Shankar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kavi Shankar 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

Jaswant Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintu Alias Umesh Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aniket Kumar Vs State of U.P.and Another

Kamlesh Chandra Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tarachand @ Tarun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh Chandra Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Another