Allowed

Pawan Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2024/1805/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a criminal appeal against a bail rejection order. Noting that no prosecution witness had been examined within a year and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, the court set aside the earlier order and granted bail to the appellant subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and behavior.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed; the order of Special Judge rejecting bail was set aside; the appellant is released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to additional conditions.

Pawan Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:68765

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1805 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Pawan Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ram Chandra Singh,Arun Sinha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Piyush Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 17.5.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 3257 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 797 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. P.G.I., District Lucknow.

¶8

In pursuance of earlier order, victim of the present case is present before this Court and admitted that in the year 2015-2017 when she was doing her P.hd in S.G.P.G.I., Lucknow, she was in the friendship with the appellant and the appellant was also willing to enter into marriage with her, as a result, they were very much intimate but appellant entered into marriage with someone else despite engagement with her, then F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.2.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.3465 of 2023. He further submits that it is evident from the prosecution case that victim was a brilliant scholar and doing P.hd at the time of incident, and appellant and victim were intimate on their choice. He further submits that appellant also completed his M.Tech in Biotechnology, thereafter, he went to Euthopia for some further studies. He further submits that applicant is in jail since 27.11.2023 and charge sheet has been filed but no evidence under Section 376 I.P.C. and

¶10

Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act is found. He further submits that all these facts were not considered by the court below at the time of rejecting the bail application, therefore, appellant is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. vehemently oppose the prayer of the appellant and submits that during the course of investigation, statement of the victim was recorded under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., in which, victim has categorically supported the prosecution version and stated that after engagement, applicant denied the marriage but he does not dispute this fact that appellant is in jail since 27.11.2023 and he also does not dispute that applicant as well as victim are research scholars.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as well as statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C., it is evident that at the time of alleged incident, victim and applicant were research scholar and applicant is in jail since 27.11.2023 but till today not even a single witness has been examined, therefore, appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

In view of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed .

¶14

Order dated 17.5.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 3257 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 797 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. P.G.I., District Lucknow, is hereby set aside.

¶15

Let appellant Pawan Kumar Yadav , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to

¶16

following additional conditions :-

¶17

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶21

It is always open to the victim that in case, she is influenced by the applicant in any manner, she can move application for bail cancellation of the applicant.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.10.2024 Gaurav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pawan Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Brajendra Kumar Tripathi Vs Shri Amit Mohan Prasad, Addl. Chief Secy. / Chairman, U.P. Handloom and Textile Industry, Lko.

Ashutosh Singh and Another Vs Ankita Singh-Ii, Incharge Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 21 Sultanpur and Another

Ram Khelawan Shukla Vs Sri Anand Kumar Singh, Managing Director, Pradeshik Cooperative Dairy Fedration Ltd., Lko.

Suresh Prasad Gupta vs Sandeep Kumar, the Chief Engineer U.P. Jal Nigam (Rural), Lko.

Ram Khilawan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Khilawan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others