Allowed

Arjun Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2023CRLA/8347/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail appeal of Arjun Chauhan in an SC/ST Act case involving allegations of rape, abuse, and assault. The court noted the late emergence of rape allegations and the appellant's upcoming high school examination as factors for bail, without expressing an opinion on the trial merits.

What did the court decide?

Appellant Arjun Chauhan released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.

Arjun Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8347 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Arjun Chauhan Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Jagadish Prasad Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

A supplementary affidavit has been filed today in Court by the learned counsel for the appellant. It is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the material available on record. No one appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed against the order dated 30.09.2022 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Azamgarh, whereby the learned Judge has rejected the appellant's Bail Application No. 4019 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 68 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 376D I.P.C. and Section 3(1)5, 3(2)5, 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station Raunapar, District Azamgarh.

¶8

The prosecution case, as mentioned in the written report dated 08.03.2022, is to the effect that on 06.03.2022 at 1 p.m. appellantaccused Arjun Chauhan along with three named and five unknown persons, hurling castiest abuses upon the informant and his family members, forcibly entered into his house. They hurled abuses upon the daughter-in-law of the informant, Gudiya, beat her and tried to outrage her modesty. Hearing hue and cry made by the victim villagers reached at the place of occurrence and saved her. The

¶9

victim became unconscious. She was carried to Community Health Center, Harraiya by 108 Ambulance. She was referred to District Hospital, Azamgarh, where she underwent medical treatment. She was medically examined by EMO, District Hospital, Azamgarh and first advised for x-ray and later on CT scan of her chest. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded on 15.03.2022 and that the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded on 21.03.2022, the victim made allegation against the appellant and co-accused of rape and threatening to murder her if she complaint to the authorities against them.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity. It is submitted that in the FIR as well as in the statement of informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. there is no allegation of rape against the appellant and the co-accused persons. It is submitted that for the first time the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and subsequently in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has introduced the allegation of rape against the appellant and the co-accused persons, which is false and afterthought. It has also been submitted that in the medical report dated 09.03.2022 of the victim, prepared by the EMO, District Hospital, Azamgarh, only four complain of pain has been mentioned. There is nothing to show that the appellant has committed rape on her. It is further submitted that Dr. Roshan Mumtaj, E.M.O, District Women Hospital, Azamgarh has reported in her report dated 17.03.2022 that there is no internal or external injury on the person of the victim.

¶11

It is also submitted that similarly circumstanced co-accused Bhola Chauhan and Surendra Chauhan have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 29.06.2022 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act)

¶12

Azamgarh entitling the appellant to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is further submitted that the appellant is appearing in the High School Examination of 2023. Documentary evidence has also been submitted in support of the appellant's registration for high school examination 2023 vide supplementary affidavit dated 08.02.2023. It is in the last submitted that the appellant is in jail since 28.07.2022 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra the learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail stating that appellant committed rape on the victim along with other co-accused persons and therefore he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Considering the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the offence, in particular, the fact that in the first information report as well as the statement of the informant there is no mention of offence under Section 376D I.P.C. and it surfaced only after the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., the medical examination report of the victim, the fact that the appellant has to appear in the High School Examination of 2023, the statement of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the period of incarceration, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the appeal is hereby allowed . The impugned order dated 30.09.2022 rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the appellant Arjun Chauhan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶17

concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) That the appellant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶19

(ii) That 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.

¶20

(iii) That after his release, the appellant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶21

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the appellant on bail.

¶22

It is made clear that in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant.

¶23

It is made clear that in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant.

¶24

It is also 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/J.J.Board shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusion on the basis of evidence led, uninfluenced by any finding or observation whatsoever in this order.

¶25

Order Date :- 9.2.2023 Brijesh Maurya

¶26

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

Arjun Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Chauhan 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

Smt. Gunja Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home and Another

Bablu Alias Amit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Maya @ Sandhya and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tapan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohanlal @ Ram Chandra @ Om Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Anr.