Allowed

Bechelal v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2024CRLA/2130/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, set aside the rejection of the appellant's bail by the trial court under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and granted bail subject to personal bond, heavy sureties, and standard non-interference conditions.

What did the court decide?

The appellant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to specified conditions regarding tampering with evidence and appearing before the trial court.

Bechelal vs State of Up and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167350

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2130 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Bechelal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Bhavya Sahai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajendra Babu Gaur

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set-aside the order dated 13.02.2024 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (Atrocity Redressal) Act, Court No. 2, Shahjahanpur, in Bail Application No. 520 of 2024, rejecting the bail of the appellant in Case Crime No. 17 of 2024, under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Sindhauli, District Shahjahanpur, (Bechelal vs. State of U.P.).

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to previous enmity. It has been further submitted that the incident took place on 18.08.2022 and the FIR was lodged after a lapse of one and half year without any plausible explanation. It has also been submitted that the victim is 37 years of age and a married lady having a son. Oral version of the victim recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. do not substantiate the medical report as the said report indicates that there is no sign of sexual assault. There is no injury report regarding injuries caused to the son of the victim. Appellant is in jail since 29.01.2024, having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶9

On the other hand, learned learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 have opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned

¶11

counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶12

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The learned trial Court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed.

¶13

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶14

Let the appellant Bechelal involved in Case Crime No. 17 of 2024, under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Sindhauli, District Shahjahanpur, (Bechelal vs. State of U.P.) be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶19

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.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.10.2024 Monika

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MONIKA KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bechelal v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bechelal v. State of Up 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

Sher Singh and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Mahesh Kumar vs State of Up and Another

Smt. Mithlesh Sharma vs State of Up and 3 Others

Hirdesh @ Motay vs State of U.P. and Another

Surya Prakash Singh Sisodiya vs State of Up and 4 Others

Smt Ruchi vs State of U.P. and 4 Others