Allowed

Pankaj Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC20 Dec 2024/2886/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal under Section 14A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against rejection of bail in a case involving rape and caste-related assault allegations. Court found prima facie no material attracting Section 376 IPC, set aside the bail rejections, and granted bail to the appellant with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 29.08.2024 and 04.09.2024 rejecting bail were set aside; appellant Pankaj Tiwari released on bail on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including no witness intimidati

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:85982

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2886 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Pankaj Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Suman Lata,Anita Singh,Shishir Pradhan

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Praveen Kumar Pandey,Sachin Verma

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A (2) the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 29.08.2024 passed in Bail application No.2102/2024 and order dated 04.09.2024 passed in Bail application No.2391/2024, arising out of case crime No.152/2024, under Sections 323, 341, 376, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jagatpur, District Raebareli.

¶9

In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 13.06.2024 at about 04:45 am while the complainant was went towards his field he saw the appellant molesting the victim. He opposed the act of the appellant and while he was going on motor-cycle to police station for lodging the F.I.R. accused person along with others came on the vehicles and have badly beaten the informant and others and have also hurled caste related abuses.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant while pressing the appeal submits that, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been committed by the appellant.

¶11

It is contended on behalf of the appellant that statement of the victim under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. are at variance. The improvement has been made by the victim while giving statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and allegation of rape has been levelled on two accused persons. The appellant has not criminal history. Victim is major and consenting party. The medically of the victim does not support the prosecution case.

¶12

It is further submitted that, the appellant is languishing in jail in this matter since 16.07.2024. There is no likelihood that the appellant-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that from the complainant side there are four injured and out of which injured Jaggannath has received fracture on his right and let arm.

¶14

Rebutting the same, learned counsel for the appellant submits that even if the entire prosecution case is admitted as it is, the case will not travel beyond Sections 325, 504 & 506 IPC. No case under Section 376 IPC is made out. The charge-sheet has been filed.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, improvement made by the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., appellant has no criminal history, appellant in in jail since 16.07.2024 and priam facie there appears to be no material to attract the Section 376 IPC and without commenting upon merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

¶16

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 29.08.2024 passed in Bail application No.2102/2024 and order dated 04.09.2024 passed in Bail application No.2391/2024, arising out of case crime No.152/2024, under Sections 323, 341, 376, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jagatpur, District Raebareli, are set aside.

¶17

Let the appellant-applicant Pankaj Tiwari involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶20

(iii) 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

¶21

facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(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 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.

¶23

(v) 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(vi) 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.

¶25

The pending application, if any, too stands disposed of.

¶26

Order Date :- 20.12.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pankaj Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Tiwari 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

Jaichand Kumar Maurya @ Putan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sajida Begum Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Sanjay Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Mithlesh Kumari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Anukul Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Vishal Pandey @ Piyush Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko