Allowed

Akhilesh Kumar Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2024/237/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal, setting aside the bail rejection order. Finding that crucial evidence like videos and call records was not collected, the Court released the appellant on bail subject to strict conditions regarding trial attendance and prohibition of adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 01.11.2023 setting aside and release of appellant on bail subject to personal bond, sureties, and specific conditions regarding trial attendance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:21847

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 237 of 2024 Appellant :- Akhilesh Kumar Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Appellant :- Bhanu Pratap Singhbisen,Prachand Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

It is evident from the record that the notice has already been served on private respondent no. 2, but none has put in appearance on his behalf and, therefore, the present case is being decided with the assistance of learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A.

¶8

This criminal appeal has been filed under Sections 14A(2) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against order dated 01.11.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 1459 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No. 131 of 2023 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Patti, District Pratapgarh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that a Civil Suit No. 782 of 2015 (Ram Keval Vs. Tulsi Ram & Ors.) in regard to land dispute is going on in between the family of the appellant as well as victim and the same is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sadar, Pratapgarh, and only with the intention to make pressure on the family of the appellant for withdrawal of the aforesaid suit, prosecution in question was initiated. It is also submitted that charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating OfÏcer in mechanical manner without recovering any photographs as well as video, as alleged in the prosecution story. It is next submitted that as per the statement of the victim, she was frequently called by the appellant for making physical

¶10

relations, but there is no evidence for conversation in between them, as the call detail was also not collected. It is lastly submitted that the court below has not considered all these facts while rejecting the bail application and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future, as till today, not even a single witness has been examined. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who does not have any criminal antecedent and is in jail since 15.05.2023, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the appellant, but does not dispute the fact that the Investigating OfÏcer has not collected any video, audio or photographs as well as call detail report of the victim and the appellant.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., medico legal report as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the genesis of the prosecution is that the compromising photographs and videos of the victim were taken by the appellant, on the basis of which, he was blackmailing the victim and she was frequently called by the appellant for making physical relations. However, neither the said videos, photos or the call detail reports were collected by the Investigating OfÏcer and the trial court failed to appreciate this aspect of the matter while passing the impugned order.

¶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

Impugned order dated 01.11.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 1459 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No. 131 of 2023 under Sections

¶15

376, 506 I.P.C., Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Patti, District Pratapgarh is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let appellant, Akhilesh Kumar Maurya 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 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A 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 appellant 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 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶21

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

¶22

Order Date :- 12.3.2024 VKS

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akhilesh Kumar Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh Kumar Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 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

G.R.S.M. Memorial College of Pharmacy Thru. Chairman Manoj Kumar vs Sri M Devraj Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Technical Education Lko. and Another

Adarsh Pratap Singh vs Vineet Jaiswal, Superintendent of Police, Dist. Gonda and Another

Raju vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko

Shivam Mehrotra @ Shivam Malhotra vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Shivam Mehrotra @ Shivam Malhotra vs State of U.P. through secretary home department U.P Government civil secretariat Lucknow

Akhilesh Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another