Anand Yadav alias Nande and another v. State of UP and others) arising out of Case Crime
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:160151 Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 875 of 2024
Legal Reasoning
Appellant :- Anand Yadav Alias Nande Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohammad Zafar Yab Khan,Shahroze Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed on behalf of the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 9.8.2023, whereby the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act (PA), Siddharth Nagar in Bail Application No.1352 of 2023 (Anand Yadav alias Nande and another vs. State of UP and others) arising out of Case Crime4 No.55 of 2023, under Sections 34, 120-B, 201, 302, 323, 504 of IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(V) & 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (PA) Act, Police Station Bhawaniganj, District Siddharth Nagar, has rejected the bail application of the appellant. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that applicant is not named in the FIR. His named surfaced during the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr PC. It is submitted that witnesses of fact have been examined and there is no chance of tempering the evidence. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. Similarly placed co-accused, namely, Rajkishor @ Kishore Taili and Chandan Yadav have been granted bail by this Court, vide orders dated 28.8.2024 and 10.9.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal Nos.3630 and 914 of 2024. The appellant has no criminal history to his credit. Appellant is languishing in jail since 9.7.2023. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the tral. 4. Per contra, learned AGA assisted by learned counsel for the informant, vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant. 5. In Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that:- "15. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India SCC para-15 it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, the Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail." 6. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of the material available on record that the trial Court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the trial Court dated 9.8.2023 is set aside. 7. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and further considering the overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under-trials, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 8. Let appellant, Anand Yadav alias Nande, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: (i) 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. (ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. (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 the trial court. (v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court the absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law. 10. The trial court may make all possible effort/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment. 11. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. 12. The criminal appeal is allowed. Order Date :- 30.9.2024 RKK/-