The High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed by the appellant seeking bail. The court set aside the Special Judge's order rejecting bail, citing oversight in the lower court's factual appreciation, and released the appellant on personal bond and surety.
Release of the appellant Manoj Kumar on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 600 of 2023
Appellant :- Manoj Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Pavan Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Despite service of notice on opposite party no.2, no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose this appeal.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1 perused the material placed on record.
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 03.01.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bijnor, has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 799 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)5, 3(1) Da, 3(1) dha, 3(2) Ba(i) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali City Bijnor, District Bijnor.
There is allegation against the appellant that he made false promise of marriage to a divorced woman having two children.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the victim befriended the appellant is her own interest because she was alone and helpless. The victim is divorcee lady having two children. Neither the appellant was committed rape of the victim nor made false promise for the marriage. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of malicious prosecution of appellant under the provisions of SC/ST Act. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 05.11.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
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.
It appears that the court below has not properly considered the facts of the case. Hence, in view of the above consideration the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 03.01.2023 is, hereby, set aside.
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 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.
Let appellant, Manoj Kumar, 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:
(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.
(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(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.
(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.
(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
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.
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.
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.
The criminal appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 18.4.2023 Abhishek
Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to bail despite the rejection by the Special Judge.
Whether the gravity of allegations precludes bail in an SC/ST case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Manoj Kumar
State of U.P.
Siddharth
Abhishek Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
