Allowed

Anjani Mishra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2023CRLA/7566/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the Allahabad High Court set aside the Special Judge’s order rejecting the appellant’s bail application. Citing jail overcrowding and the mandate of Article 21, the Court released the appellant on bail with personal bond and sureties, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering, intimidation, and presence in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:184916

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7566 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Anjani Mishra Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Jai Prakash Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

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 13.06.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Mau has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 158 of 2022, under Sections 34, 190, 323, 328, 504, 506, 313, 376 of IPC, and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Rampur, District Mau.

¶8

The case of the prosecution as per the FIR is that the appellant performed marriage with the prosecutrix on 28.04.2015 and continued to establish physical relations with her. The appellant performed second marriage but continued to have physical relations with the prosecutirx. The appellant caused miscarriage of the prosecutrix.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the prosecutrix is a major lady and she was a consenting party. She made physical relations with the appellant at her own accord. The prosecutrix refused to undergo for her internal and external medical examination. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated first time that physical relations were established by the appellant in the year 2017 which is contradictory to the FIR. It is also submitted that in the counter affidavit filed by the informant she has filed an affidavit stating that she does not want to prosecute this case. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. Applicant is languishing in jail since 07.12.2022 having no

¶10

criminal history. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by learned counsel for the informant 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.

¶12

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the trial court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the trial court dated 13.6.2023 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 appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let appellant, Anjani Mishra 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:

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

(vi) The appellant 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 appellant, 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 :- 25.9.2023 Mohit

¶26

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

Anjani Mishra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjani Mishra 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shejal Sonkar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr. Shiv Shankar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhole Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jahid Vs State of U.P. and Another