Allowed

Tejendar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2023CRLA/6022/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Allahabad High Court overturned the Special Judge's rejection of a bail application. The court held that the appellant had established grounds for bail.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order rejecting bail set aside. Appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148525

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6022 of 2023 Appellant :- Tejendar Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Jitendra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Pandey,Sanjay Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of appellant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 23.05.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Pilibhit in Bail Application No. 1125 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 93 of 2023, under Sections 452, 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC & Sections 3 (1) (Da), 3 (1) (Dha) & 3 (2) (5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Neoria, District Pilibhit.

¶8

As per prosecution version, prior to one month of lodging the first informant report, when the prosecutrix was alone in her house, appellant entered into her house and committed obscene activities with her. On 23.03.2023, when informant/victim made complaint to the family members of the appellant, at around 1:00 pm, he alongwith two others entered into her house. He committed marpeet with her and also humiliated her by abusing caste based words.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The incident is said to have been occurred prior to one month of lodging the F.I.R. It is further submitted that in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she repeated the same version as alleged in the F.I.R. while in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she changed her previous version and made allegation of rape against the appellant. In her statement recorded

¶10

under Section 164 Cr.P.C, she alleged that when incident took place, her son was also standing at the place of incident. However, no statement of her son was recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation. During her medical examination no sign of rape was observed. It is further submitted that father of appellant executed a sale deed in favour of husband of the informant in the years 2018 but the informant wants to grab the land of appellant adjacent to her land by falsely implicating the appellant in the present case. The appellant does not have any criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that there is no chance of the appellant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellant is languishing in jail since 30.03.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail by contending that as per the medical report of the victim, all injuries sustained by her caused by friction. Hence, the medical report corroborates the version of prosecution.

¶12

In rebuttal learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per medical report of the victim, injury nos. 1 and 2 are simple in nature.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶14

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶15

Let the appellant, namely, Tejendar Singh involved in the above case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

(v) 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.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 25.7.2023 AKT

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tejendar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tejendar Singh 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

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kallu @ Lavkush Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Muzakkir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhatrapal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Thakur Vs State of U.P. and Another