The High Court allowed an appeal against the rejection of a bail application under the SC/ST Act. Setting aside the lower court's order, the Court directed the release of the appellant on bail subject to conditions.
The appellant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties, subject to conditions.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. A (SJ) No. 44 of 2021
Upendra Tiwari …..Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Anita Devi ….Respondents -----
Coram: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
----- For the Appellant : M/s Jitendra S. Singh & Randhir Kumar, Advs For the State : Mr. Suraj Verma, A. P. P. For the Resp. No.2 : Mrs. Seema Kumari Singh, Advocate.
05/14.07.2021 Heard the parties.
The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 14 (A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated 16.12.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions JudgeI, Koderma in MCA No. 384 of 2020 in connection with Nawalshahi P. S. Case No. 90 of 2018 corresponding to SC/ST Case No. 04 of 2020, whereby the bail petition of the appellant was rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is in custody since 21.09.2020. Investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has been submitted on 31.10.2020. It has been further submitted that the FIR has been lodged on 05.11.2018, although the incident is of dated 29.09.2018. Medical report does not support the allegation. Further in split up of the trial, the main accused namely Sitaram Tiwari has already been acquitted by the Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Koderma vide judgment dated 04.03.2020. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C., she has not supported the allegation against this appellant. On the above fact, prayer for bail has been made.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has not opposed the prayer for bail.
In the attending facts and circumstances of the case and considering the material available on records, the appellant is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Koderma in connection with Nawalshahi P. S. Case No. 90 of 2018 corresponding to SC/ST Case No. 04 of 2020 subject to the condition that the appellant will submit self attested copy of his Aadhar Card and also give his mobile number before the learned court below which he will not change during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.
Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 16.12.2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Koderma in MCA No. 384 of 2020 in connection with Nawalshahi P. S. Case No. 90 of 2018 corresponding to SC/ST Case No. 04 of 2020 is, hereby, set aside.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
kamlesh/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant should be released on bail when investigation is completed and the main accused has been acquitted in a split trial.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the bail petition should be set aside.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Upendra Tiwari
The State of Jharkhand
Anita Devi
RAJESH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
