Vivek Alias Binu Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

Application No. 1594 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections- 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 IPC and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Lalganj, District- Pratapgarh.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the co-accused, namely, Sunil Singh, having been similar role has already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

30.01.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.651 of 2021. The order referred 2 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 reads as under: "1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated

04.02.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in 3rd Bail Application No. 140 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Lalganh, District Pratapgarh.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to enmity. It is further submitted that the it is a cross case, in which, members of both the sides received injuries and two persons from the side of the complainant died later on due to injuries. It is also submitted that five persons from the side of appellant including the appellant also received injuries and their medico legal examination was also conducted at the behest of police officials. However, F.I.R. of the appellant's side was not lodged and thereafter under the order passed by the court below on the application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Case Crime No. 344 of 2015 was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 326, 308, 324, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Lalganj, District Pratapgarh. It is next submitted that the Investigating Officer submitted final report on the basis of presumption that when the appellant and other accused persons were committing the crime of case in question, the other villagers rushed to the spot and started pelting stones, in which, the accused persons received injuries. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the injuries found on the body of the appellant and other accused persons do not support the story, as developed by the Investigating Officer in the said case, as several injuries are incised wound, but there is no explanation. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has also been implicated in 8 other cases, one of which is related to the proceedings under Section 1(10)(g) Cr.P.C. and another is Section 3(1) of U.P. Goonda Control Act. In 3 cases, out of rest of the six cases, final report has been submitted by the Investigating Officer and in 3 cases, the appellant is on bail. It is vehemently submitted that all the witnesses of fact have already 3 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 been examined and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence. It is lastly submitted that the court below has not considered all these facts while rejecting the bail application. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who is in jail since

31.05.2015, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant oppose the prayer of the appellant and submit that twice final report was submitted by the Investigating Officer in the F.I.R. lodged by the side of appellant, i.e., Case Crime No. 344 of 2015 (supra) and the same has already been accepted. It is further submitted that the said order was challenged before the revisional court, which was dismissed. Thereafter, appellant has chosen to file complaint before the Magistrate concerned, in which, summoning order was passed, which has been stayed by this Court. However, they do not dispute the fact that all the witnesses of fact have already been examined. They also admit that the examination-in-chief has also been concluded, but the cross-examination could not have been done as the appellant is not being produced from the jail before the trial court.

6. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of the appeal, F.I.R., impugned order, post mortem report of the deceased persons, medico legal report of the appellant and other co-accused persons as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the appellant has also received injuries in the alleged incident along with other co-accused persons. It is also evident that all the witnesses of fact have already been examined.

7. 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.

8. Impugned order dated 04.02.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in 3rd Bail Application No. 140 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Lalganh, District Pratapgarh is hereby set aside. 4 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024

9. Let appellant, Sunil Singh 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 :- (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. (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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. (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 sufficient 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.

10. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. District & Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh is directed to ensure the compliance of the directions of this Court. "

4. It has been further stated that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined before the trial court and in view of the matter that there is 5 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 no possibility of tempering the main witnesses of the prosecution and other witnesses are formal witnesses and in view of the matter, the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely weak.

5. He has also stated that the appellant was apprehended on 31.05.2015 and thereafter on 22.12.2017 an order regarding short term bail was passed by this Court and in compliance thereof the appellant was released on 30.01.2018 and for some reason, he could not surrender in terms of the order dated 22.12.2017 and therefore, he was declared absconder and thereafter he was apprehended and taken into custody and sent to jail and he is in jail since 18.09.2018.

6. It is also stated that in view of the aforesaid period of incarceration of the appellant is about 9½ years (nine and half years).

7. It is also stated that taking note of the period of incarceration i.e. about nine and half years as also the fact that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined before the trial court and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely weak, the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

8. It is further submitted that appellant, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 18.09.2018. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail.

9. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons, namely, Sunil Singh has already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court.

10. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as also that co-accused persons, namely, Sunil Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

11. Upon due consideration 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, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is 6 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 accordingly, allowed.

12. Order dated 20.06.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in 3rd Bail Application No. 1594 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections- 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 IPC and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Lalganj, District- Pratapgarh is hereby set aside.

13. Let the appellant- Vivek Alias Binu Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) 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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) 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.

14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified 7 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. September 19, 2025 KR (Saurabh Lavania,J.)

Application No. 1594 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections- 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 IPC and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Lalganj, District- Pratapgarh.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the co-accused, namely, Sunil Singh, having been similar role has already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

30.01.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.651 of 2021. The order referred 2 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 reads as under: "1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated

04.02.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in 3rd Bail Application No. 140 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Lalganh, District Pratapgarh.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to enmity. It is further submitted that the it is a cross case, in which, members of both the sides received injuries and two persons from the side of the complainant died later on due to injuries. It is also submitted that five persons from the side of appellant including the appellant also received injuries and their medico legal examination was also conducted at the behest of police officials. However, F.I.R. of the appellant's side was not lodged and thereafter under the order passed by the court below on the application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Case Crime No. 344 of 2015 was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 326, 308, 324, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Lalganj, District Pratapgarh. It is next submitted that the Investigating Officer submitted final report on the basis of presumption that when the appellant and other accused persons were committing the crime of case in question, the other villagers rushed to the spot and started pelting stones, in which, the accused persons received injuries. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the injuries found on the body of the appellant and other accused persons do not support the story, as developed by the Investigating Officer in the said case, as several injuries are incised wound, but there is no explanation. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has also been implicated in 8 other cases, one of which is related to the proceedings under Section 1(10)(g) Cr.P.C. and another is Section 3(1) of U.P. Goonda Control Act. In 3 cases, out of rest of the six cases, final report has been submitted by the Investigating Officer and in 3 cases, the appellant is on bail. It is vehemently submitted that all the witnesses of fact have already 3 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 been examined and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence. It is lastly submitted that the court below has not considered all these facts while rejecting the bail application. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who is in jail since

31.05.2015, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant oppose the prayer of the appellant and submit that twice final report was submitted by the Investigating Officer in the F.I.R. lodged by the side of appellant, i.e., Case Crime No. 344 of 2015 (supra) and the same has already been accepted. It is further submitted that the said order was challenged before the revisional court, which was dismissed. Thereafter, appellant has chosen to file complaint before the Magistrate concerned, in which, summoning order was passed, which has been stayed by this Court. However, they do not dispute the fact that all the witnesses of fact have already been examined. They also admit that the examination-in-chief has also been concluded, but the cross-examination could not have been done as the appellant is not being produced from the jail before the trial court.

6. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of the appeal, F.I.R., impugned order, post mortem report of the deceased persons, medico legal report of the appellant and other co-accused persons as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the appellant has also received injuries in the alleged incident along with other co-accused persons. It is also evident that all the witnesses of fact have already been examined.

7. 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.

8. Impugned order dated 04.02.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in 3rd Bail Application No. 140 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Lalganh, District Pratapgarh is hereby set aside. 4 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024

9. Let appellant, Sunil Singh 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 :- (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. (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (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. (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 sufficient 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.

10. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. District & Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh is directed to ensure the compliance of the directions of this Court. "

4. It has been further stated that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined before the trial court and in view of the matter that there is 5 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 no possibility of tempering the main witnesses of the prosecution and other witnesses are formal witnesses and in view of the matter, the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely weak.

5. He has also stated that the appellant was apprehended on 31.05.2015 and thereafter on 22.12.2017 an order regarding short term bail was passed by this Court and in compliance thereof the appellant was released on 30.01.2018 and for some reason, he could not surrender in terms of the order dated 22.12.2017 and therefore, he was declared absconder and thereafter he was apprehended and taken into custody and sent to jail and he is in jail since 18.09.2018.

6. It is also stated that in view of the aforesaid period of incarceration of the appellant is about 9½ years (nine and half years).

7. It is also stated that taking note of the period of incarceration i.e. about nine and half years as also the fact that all the witnesses of facts have already been examined before the trial court and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely weak, the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

8. It is further submitted that appellant, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 18.09.2018. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail.

9. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons, namely, Sunil Singh has already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court.

10. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as also that co-accused persons, namely, Sunil Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

11. Upon due consideration 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, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is 6 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 accordingly, allowed.

12. Order dated 20.06.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in 3rd Bail Application No. 1594 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 202 of 2015, under Sections- 302, 452, 323, 504, 506, 374 IPC and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Lalganj, District- Pratapgarh is hereby set aside.

13. Let the appellant- Vivek Alias Binu Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (v) 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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) 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.

14. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified 7 CRLA No. 2638 of 2024 that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. September 19, 2025 KR (Saurabh Lavania,J.)