The High Court allowed an appeal against the rejection of bail in a case under the SC/ST Act and IPC sections. The court held the trial court failed to properly consider the appellant's case and granted bail based on jail overcrowding and the right to speedy trial.
The appellant was released on bail in the aforementioned criminal appeal number.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:191017
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9060 of 2023
Appellant :- Vikas Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vishveshwar Mani Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Sandeep Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel on behalf of informant is taken on record.
Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record.
Amendment application filed today by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record.
(Order on Criminal Misc. Amendment Application)
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that during investigation Section 120B I.P.C has also been added in which the bail application of the appellant stands rejected. Rejection order is been annexed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of amendment application.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he may be permitted to make necessary correction in the appeal.
As prayed learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to make correction accordingly in due course of the day.
Accordingly, Amendment Application is allowed.
(Order on Criminal Appeal)
Learned A.G.A informed that service on opposite party no. 2 is sufficient as per record available with him.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and 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 25.08.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Deoria has rejected the bail application No. 1683 of 2023, arising out of case crime no. 300 of 2023, under Section 323, 504, 506, 392, 411, 120B of IPC, and under Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act and Section 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station Gauri Bazar, District Deoria.
The prosecution case as per the F.I.R is that on 02.08.2022 at around 7:00 p.m when the informant was going to his village on his motor-cycle the appellant along-with other co-accused overtake his motor-cycle by four wheeler and addressed him with caste related words and has beaten him. Appellant snatched Rs. 2200/from the informant and tried to kill by strangulating his neck.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case because he belongs to rival party. He further submitted that general role has been assigned to all the accused, no specific role has been assigned to the appellant. It is also submitted that no weapon was recovered either on the pointing out or from the possession of the appellant. So far as recovery of Rs. 700/- is concerned, the amount belongs to the appellant himself. It is further submitted that injury sustained by the informant are simple in nature. It is also submitted that eye witness Santosh Nishad did not identify the appellant at the place of occurrence. Appellant is languishing in jail since 05.08.2023 having no criminal history. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. have supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.
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. The impugned rejection order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.
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.
Let appellant, Vikas Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two local 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 :- 4.10.2023 PS
Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to set aside the order rejecting bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Whether the trial court failed to properly consider the appellant's case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vikas Yadav
State of U.P. and Another
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
