Allowed

Rajesh Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2023CRLA/871/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 871 of 2023, the Allahabad High Court allowed the appellant's appeal to set aside an order rejecting his bail. The appellant alleged false implication in a gang rape case and lack of pre-charge investigation. The court quashed the lower court order and granted bail under the Prevention of Atrocities Act.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting bail dated 13.1.2023 is set aside; the appellant is released on bail subject to conditions.

Rajesh Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 871 of 2023

¶3

Appellant :- Rajesh Pratap Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- P.K. Singh,Kuldeep Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amod Pandey,Navin Kumar Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Counter afÏdavit filed by Shri Navin Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant;Shri Navin Kumar Sharma,learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 learned AGA for the State 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 13.1.2023, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Chitrakoot has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Complaint Case No. 79 of 2019, under Sections 452,376D,506 IPC and Section 3(2) (V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Pahadi, District Chitrakoot.

¶8

There is allegation against the appellant and two co-accused regarding commission of gang rape after entering the house of the women belonging to S.C./S.T. There is also allegation of threatening. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that victim is married women. She has implicated the appellant after proceedings under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.. The aforesaid application has been treated as complaint..Merely on the basis of statement of the victim and witnesses appellant has been implicated. There Is no corroborative against the appellant. Appellant is manager of an educational institution .He has been falsely implicated at the behest of the two teachers of the institution who were ousted from job by the appellant because of their ineligibility . There is no medical report in support of the prosecution case.The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 13.01.2023 In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have supported the order passed by the Sessions court

¶10

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.

¶11

In view of above, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 13.01.2023 is, hereby, set aside.

¶12

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; applicant 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, I am of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let appellant, Rajesh Pratap Singh 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:

¶14

(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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

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 sufÏcient 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.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶24

Order Date :- 13.4.2023

¶25

Atul kr. sri.

¶26

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

Rajesh Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Pratap 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bramhanand Pal Vs State of U.P.

Kasif Vs State of U.P.

Patara @ Uday Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gajendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Meera Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another